1 <Day 9 Tuesday, 25th January 2000. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have your clip which I obviously 3have not had time to read. Before we get into that, shall 4we, as proposed, just look ahead and consider what is 5going to be happening? We are going to have Professor van 6Pelt today, is that right? 7MR RAMPTON: Yes, my Lord, that right. 8MR IRVING: Yes. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: So that the transcript is clear, that is him 10being interposed in order to be called by the Defendants 11and cross-examined because he has commitments elsewhere. 12Is it expected he will be finished in a day? 13MR IRVING: I doubt it, my Lord. I think two days. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. So when will he resume? He cannot be 15here tomorrow, Mr Rampton, can he? 16MR RAMPTON: He can tomorrow but not Thursday. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: So we should get rid of him. 18MR RAMPTON: If he can be done in two days, so much the better; 19if he cannot, he can come back on Friday. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have to keep within reasonable bounds so 21I hope he will be finished within two days. 22MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving's original estimate for him was three 23days. We asked what the estimate was. But, if it is two 24days, so much the better. If we have Friday a blank, as 25it were, then I shall continue cross-examining Mr Irving 26on Friday, I suppose.

. P-2

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 2MR RAMPTON: Then on Monday, Professor McDonald, and I do not 3know about Dr Fox, it may be him too. I do not know. 4That is in Mr Irving's hands. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: I cannot remember who Professor McDonald is. 6MR IRVING: My expert witness. 7MR RAMPTON: He is a social scientist, I think. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: How long is he going to be, just so that you 9are communicating about timing? 10MR IRVING: I shall be submitting various documents to him with 11your Lordship's permission, my Lord, and it depends on 12whether Mr Rampton wishes to cross-examine him or not. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: He may not know the answer to that until he 14knows in more detail what he is going to say. 15MR RAMPTON: I have a pretty good idea what he is going to 16say. The answer is if I cross-examine him at all, it will 17be quite shortly, I expect. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: And then Fox? 19MR RAMPTON: I do not know about Mr Fox. That is Mr Irving's 20witness. 21MR IRVING: I expect Dr Fox will be half a day, my Lord, if 22that. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. 24MR RAMPTON: Then, my Lord, I hope I will be able to complete 25any outstanding issues arising out of Evans and the 26political scientists in the remainder of the four days of

. P-3

1that week. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 3MR RAMPTON: I would be disappointed if I do not. I would hope 4I would be quicker than that. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think I would too. I think you have been 6through the most -- if I can use the word "laborious" 7without giving offence -- laborious bit. 8MR RAMPTON: No, not laborious, perhaps the most important 9issues anyway. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Distorting history on Hitler. 11MR RAMPTON: Distorting Hitler and Holocaust denial by means of 12Auschwitz denial. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: So at the end of those four days, will that 14complete your cross-examination? 15MR RAMPTON: Yes, it should do. As your Lordship knows, 16Reichskristallnacht is a bit fiddly. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is quite convoluted. 18MR RAMPTON: It is convoluted, exactly, so it may take a bit of 19time. Then, my Lord, we are now being speculative, in a 20sense, provisional, we would hope to start our evidence, 21excluding Professor van Pelt, on Monday, whatever it is of 22February, with possibly Professor Browning, possibly 23Dr Longerich, possibly Professor Evans, I do not know. 24Then I think perhaps the only political scientists we will 25call as a witness is Fulkhan, the German. But that is a 26little bit in the future.

. P-4

1 I have put question marks against Levin and 2Eatwell and also against the Russian witness Tarasov 3because, quite frankly, having regard to the witness 4statement of Mr Irving's witness, the journalist, Peter 5Miller, I do not think Mr Tarasov has anything to add at 6all. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: I will say again that I think in relation to 8the Moscow diaries some sort of accommodation might be 9possible. 10MR IRVING: My Lord, I do wish to make certain fundamental 11observations about the way the case is being conducted so 12far. I do not know if this is the appropriate moment. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think now is probably the moment for you to 14do that, unless you would rather reserve it for later? 15MR IRVING: It is brief but to the point, my Lord. I am the 16Claimant in this action. This is my action, and I spent 17yesterday evening indulging in a little bit of light 18reading in the Civil Procedure Rules and my eye alighted 19on Lord Woolf's wise words towards the beginning of the 20introduction to the Rules which states that all steps have 21to be taken to ensure complete equity between the parties. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. That is my major function. 23MR IRVING: It is a major departure from the old system. He 24said, he identified a range of defects in the existing 25civil justice system, the third of which was that it was 26too unequal in that there was a lack of equality between

. P-5

1the powerful, wealthy litigant and the under-resourced 2litigant. 3 My Lord, I am up against a powerful, wealthy 4litigant here, as evidenced by the fact that I stand here 5alone and on the other side of your Lordship's court are 6sometimes between 20 and 40 experts, researchers, 7solicitors, learned counsel, arrayed against me ---- 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: That had not escaped my notice. 9MR IRVING: --- funded by the most enormous resources. 10Somehow, the sequence of events has got reversed. Your 11Lordship will remember that when we embarked on this two 12and a half weeks ago, we were looking at the prospect of 13holding off Auschwitz until towards the end of the 14discussions, but now Auschwitz has somehow come right up 15in front. 16 Their witnesses have been interspersed in the 17middle of my presentation of the case. It now turns out 18that Professor Robert Jan van Pelt is here at this time 19purely because it is convenient to him because he is going 20on a Holocaust junket to Stockholm on Thursday together 21with the Second Defendant. I do not see why I should be 22inconvenienced in this way, my Lord. I do not, frankly, 23understand why your Lordship is tolerating it. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Partly, Mr Irving, because you have not until 25now raised any objection. We have been discussing for 26some days now when Dr Van Pelt might give his evidence.

. P-6

1I had understood (and I will be corrected by reference to 2the transcript if I am wrong about this) that you had not 3raised any objection and, indeed, I had understood you to 4concur with his being interposed at this stage. 5MR IRVING: But the inevitable result is, my Lord, that this 6means that Auschwitz has been brought right to the front 7of this case purely for the convenience of one of the 8witnesses who intends to fly to Stockholm on this lavish 9junket Thursday for which the whole court is having to 10hold its breath for a day. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am a bit puzzled, Mr Irving, about this 12protest because you were cross-examined for the whole of 13yesterday about Auschwitz, so there is no question of 14Auschwitz having suddenly being brought to the forefront 15of the case. It was brought to the forefront of the case 16when cross-examination was embarked on yesterday morning. 17MR IRVING: The inevitable result, of course, has been that it 18has driven a cart and horses right through my preparations 19for the major part of the case. Also, it has had the 20unfortunate effect of putting in front of your Lordship 21and, of course, the public the entire opposition case, so 22to speak, without my being able to lead all the evidence 23which I intended to lead in advance which is the normal 24way that it should have been conducted. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course that is right. In a case like this 26where it is judge alone, in a way one is able to be more

. P-7

1accommodating with witnesses' personal difficulties. 2MR IRVING: Yes. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: The problem I have now is that you are 4telling me really I think for the first time that you are 5unhappy about Professor van Pelt being interposed, but he 6is here. We have been proceeding on the basis that he 7would be interposed without any dissent from you. I am 8rather reluctant, unless you want to press it, to change 9the schedule. 10MR IRVING: Well, my Lord, it is obviously too late to change 11the schedule now, but I wish to draw your attention purely 12to the disadvantageous effect it has on me. Your Lordship 13has now been presented with all the hostile evidence in 14advance of the evidence which I would normally put first 15as the Claimant. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a bit unreal. I have read all the 17expert reports before the case started, as you know and as 18Mr Rampton knows. So I knew very well what the case on 19Auschwitz against you is going to be. 20MR IRVING: With the utmost respect, my Lord, of course, a lot 21of our case depends upon the spin that various parties put 22on words ---- 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course that is true. 24MR IRVING: --- and on documents which your Lordship has not 25even seen yet. The only way that I can introduce those 26documents, I believe, is by putting them to the expert

. P-8

1witnesses. These are documents which your Lordship has 2not even seen yet because, as far as I can see, the 3bundles do not include them. This is the unfortunate 4result. But I shall try to prepare it as well as can I 5over the next few days, my Lord, but I cannot understand 6why we are being held hostage to this convention in 7Stockholm. It has nothing to do with this court. It 8appears to be the only reason why Professor van Pelt was 9come over at the beginning of the case rather than in the 10proper timing. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: I must say I would have listened with great 12sympathy to the point you are now making if you had made 13it a bit earlier. Your problem is you have left it really 14until the very last minute to raise this objection. 15MR IRVING: If learned counsel had informed us that the only 16reason why Professor van Pelt was over at this end of the 17month rather than in the proper period was for his own 18personal convenience in order that he can combine it with 19this junket in Stockholm, then ---- 20MR RAMPTON: That is just not right. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let me hear Mr Rampton on this, Mr Irving. 22What is the reason? 23MR RAMPTON: It has always been my intention to start my 24cross-examination with Auschwitz. Because Mr Irving fell 25short in chief -- I know not why -- I started 26cross-examining earlier than I had expected. His original

. P-9

1estimate for his own case was two to three weeks. 2 I, therefore, got Professor van Pelt over here 3for Monday, 24th January, when I was expecting to start my 4whole cross-examination with Auschwitz. Stockholm, as it 5happened, came later, his appointment at Stockholm. 6Incidentally, I add that the First Defendant, Professor 7Lipstadt, is not going to Stockholm, despite what 8Mr Irving says. That is why Professor van Pelt is here. 9 I then read, if I may, what Mr Irving said 10on Tuesday, 11th January, at the beginning of this case. 11This is page 5: 12 "I am perfectly prepared to have Professor van 13Pelt come over in the middle of whatever else is going on 14and we can take him as a separate entirety. He is 15certainly an extremely interesting witness to be heard". 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I had got the impression that this was 17all happening by agreement really on both sides. 18MR RAMPTON: Yes. There cannot be any question about it. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, we are going to have Professor van 20Pelt now for you to cross-examine. But one thing I have 21said before now and I say it again, I am very conscious of 22the burden that is being placed upon you. It must be 23gigantic. I think it is going to get more difficult when 24you are cross-examining. If you want more time when the 25court is not sitting so that you have got the ability to 26prepare and so on, all you have to do is ask and within

. P-10

1reason I will try to accommodate you. 2MR IRVING: That would have been the request that I would 3have ultimately submitted, my Lord. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think, when you have one expert after 5another, as Mr Rampton was forecasting will happen in 6about 10 days' time, that is when I think your 7difficulties will be at their worst. If then you want 8time between the witnesses to prepare yourself, then again 9within reason I will try to accommodate you. 10MR IRVING: My Lord, as to my remarks about the Second 11Defendant also going to Stockholm, that was based on the 12Swedish government's announcement that she was attending. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, you have been told by Mr Rampton that 14she is not. 15MR IRVING: She is listed in all the agenda at the conference 16as a speakered. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, I think it is unlikely she will be 18going in view of what Mr Rampton has said. 19MR IRVING: Very well, my Lord. They are the only submissions 20I had to make on that. I wished really to draw to your 21Lordship's attention, that is all, that things have been 22taken out of my hands in an unsatisfactory way. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, my function is to make sure that 24you are not disadvantaged because you have no lawyers. 25I cannot provide you with a back up team, obviously, but 26I am trying to look after your interests, as judges always

. P-11

1do with litigants in person. But so far, I do not believe 2you have suffered any disadvantage. 3MR IRVING: Well, only inasmuch as I have not had the 4opportunity to put before your Lordship the documents on 5which I rely as yet which would be the normal sequence of 6events. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: You could have done that before the trial 8started. 9MR IRVING: Well, my Lord, the bundles had been prepared 10entirely by the Defence. They are not agreed bundles. 11They have large lacunae in them, as your Lordship will see 12when the time comes. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but you knew that you had the 14opportunity to put before the court any bundles of 15documents that you wanted to rely on. 16MR IRVING: This is precisely what we were working on when the 17Defendants came charging in with a reversal of the 18timetable, my Lord. This is basically the problem, yes. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. Right now you want to take me through 20some documents, do you, before Professor van Pelt goes 21into the witness box? 22MR RAMPTON: My Lord, can I, first of all, add one thing before 23that discussion is closed? It is this. I think I need to 24say it because inevitably sometimes Mr Irving has 25attempted to use the court as a public platform. True it 26is there is an inequality of resources; true also it is,

. P-12

1however, that my clients are defending a suit brought by 2Mr Irving. It reminds one of the old French proverb: 3"These animals are very naughty. They defend themselves 4when they are attacked". 5MR IRVING: That proverb cuts both ways, Mr Rampton. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, that is enough of that. Now, do 7you want to do this now? Is that what you are proposing? 8MR IRVING: Do I wish to? 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Address me on these documents you handed in 10this morning? 11MR IRVING: One or two of them, my Lord. The others are there 12purely for the purposes of being in your Lordship's hands 13when we start with Professor van Pelt. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Just so we get things done in the right way, 15I think you ought to go back into the witness box just to 16deal with whatever evidence you want to give arising out 17of yesterday. It is just so we know which hat you are 18wearing, advocate or witness. It is difficult, but I 19think it is quite important to keep an eye on the 20difference. 21<MR IRVING, recalled.22< Examined by the Court23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right? 24THE WITNESS: The first document, my Lord, is the one headed 25"Institute for Historical Review". This is a letter 26written by the Institute for Historical Review to

. P-13

1Professor Gerald Fleming who is an acknowledged expert on 2the Holocaust. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 4A.
[Mr Irving]
And I draw your Lordship's attention purely to the 5paragraph on the second page which I printed in bold face, 6the last paragraph. Your Lordship was enquiring about 7what other reports after the Leuchter report continued to 8support that contention, and here is a very useful summary 9of them: "Rudolf reached essentially the same conclusion 10as had American gas chamber specialist, Fred Leuchter, in 11his 1988 forensic investigation of the allied gas chambers 12at Auschwitz and Birkenhau. You may also be aware that as 13a result of Leuchter's findings, the Institute of Forensic 14Research in Cracow conducted a partial investigation and 15that its forensic analysis, given in a 16confidential September 1990 report, corroborated 17Leuchter's findings". Your Lordship may remember that 18I referred to the fact --- 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, you did. 20MR IRVING: --- that the Auschwitz authority had locked it 21away. "This report was published in the summer 1991 22Journal of Historical Review. Moreover, Austrian 23engineer, Walter Luftel, who was, in fact, the President 24of the Austrian Federation of Engineers, 25explicitly endorsed Leuchter's findings in the detailed 26March 1992 report published in the winter 1992 to 1993

. P-14

1Journal, and the German engineer, Wolfgang Schuster, and 2the American research chemist, William Linsky, reached 3conclusions similar to those of Leuchter and Rudolf". 4More of that is relevant, but that is the only paragraph 5that I would just draw to your Lordship's attention to 6bear out the fact that Leuchter was not one lone voice 7crying in the wilderness. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: We are taking a relaxed view of the rules 9about evidence, but this is Mr Weber of the Institute for 10Historical Review telling Professor Fleming what he says 11these various individuals concluded. 12A.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Are you going to show me the Rudolf report in due course? 14A.
[Mr Irving]
The Rudolf report ---- 15Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Not now. 16A.
[Mr Irving]
I should have handed it to your Lordship. 17Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Do not worry now, but this is rather third hand, is it 18not? That is what I am saying. 19A.
[Mr Irving]
It is, my Lord, but the Rudolf report is the glossy blue 20publication which I brought in about a dozen copies this 21morning, and through an oversight it obviously was not 22listed in discovery for which I do apologise. That was an 23omission. 24Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Yes, that is that? 25A.
[Mr Irving]
My Lord, the only other document I draw to your Lordship's 26attention is the one headed top left, it is an invoice

. P-15

1Vedag, V-E-D-A-G. 2Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Yes, I noticed that. 3A.
[Mr Irving]
And it is the United Cardboard Factory of Silesia. It is 4an invoice to Auschwitz crematorium -- I am sorry, it is 5an invoice to the central construction office in 6Auschwitz, 28th July, an invoice concerning the Auschwitz 7crematorium for ---- 8Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
"Entwesungsanlage"? 9A.
[Mr Irving]
Just the first two or three lines inside the box on the 10invoice shows that it is for sealing work, S-E-A-L-I-N-G 11work, carried out for the Entwesungsanlage -- E-N-T ---- 12Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
And that is the delousing chamber? 13A.
[Mr Irving]
Disinfestation chamber, or disinfestation installation, 14strictly speaking. I mean, we may have an interesting 15discussion with Professor van Pelt about precisely what 16that was, but certainly it tends to bear out my contention 17of one of the uses to which that building was being put. 18My Lord, that is all I wish to say from the witness box. 19Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Just let me get that. Thank you very much. I think you 20can go back and resume your role as ---- 21MR RAMPTON: Could I just ask one question before he does, my 22Lord? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Arising out of that? 24MR RAMPTON: Yes, it is only an administrative question. 25< Cross-examined by MR RAMPTON26Q.
[Mr Rampton]
I want to know, Mr Irving, whether you received yesterday

. P-16

1an invoice, I think it is, or something of that nature -- 2I cannot find it at the moment -- dated 13th April 1943 3from Topf to the Zentralebauleitung at Auschwitz 4concerning [German - document not provided]. 5A.
[Mr Irving]
I received just a loose document faxed through to me 6sometime in the evening, yes. 7Q.
[Mr Rampton]
You did receive it? That is all I wanted to know. 8A.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Good. Thank you very much. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: That does not tell me very much. 11MR RAMPTON: Has your Lordship not got it? 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, well, if I have, I am not aware of having 13it. 14A.
[Mr Irving]
Can I be shown a copy now in case there is any comment 15I wish to make on it? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: There are an awful lot of spare bits of paper 17flowing around. It seems extraordinary when ---- 18MR RAMPTON: This arose simply because yesterday for the first 19time Mr Irving brought to our attention a document dated 2020th August 1943 which on its second page, as we now see, 21is a bill from Topf, or an invoice, it mentions 22"Entwesungsanlage", as does the piece of paper that he 23has just given to us and to your Lordship. There is, in 24fact, another piece of paper which is very likely related 25to it which as its last item but one mentions two Topf 26entwesungsofen ----

. P-17

1A.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 2Q.
[Mr Rampton]
--- for crematorium (ii). Those are delousing ovens? 3A.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Rampton]
I make no comment beyond that. I will hand that up to 5your Lordship because I am sure your Lordship will need it 6in due course. It goes with the other two documents from 7Mr Irving's side. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall I put it in J as well because I am 9really anxious we keep an eye -- I seem to have the Rudolf 10report at the same time. 11A.
[Mr Irving]
That is the Rudolf report, my Lord. 12MR RAMPTON: It might be convenient to have them in 13chronological order. That document I have just handed up 14will be the first. The second would be the one that 15Mr Irving has just handed in dated 28th July. The last 16would be the document we got last night, if we did, which 17is the invoice from Topf. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. That is the only questions, so would 19you mind going back. 20<(The witness stood down)21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Rampton, you are going to call your 22witness? 23MR RAMPTON: Yes, my Lord, I am. I preface calling him with 24this request, perhaps is the right word. I have the 25impression, and so do others, that the question of the 26various Polish reports may be a little bit confused.

. P-18

1 The Rudolf report only came up yesterday. 2Professor van Pelt has not read the Rudolf report. He 3does not have a copy with him, but he does know something 4about it. What I propose to do is to ask just a very few 5questions in chief just to get that question straight, if 6your Lordship permits it? 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. Anything, as it were, that has 8surfaced since he did his written report, I think that is 9entirely proper. 10MR RAMPTON: This arises out of two things, one the Rudolf 11report mentioned for the first time yesterday, and second 12what I perceive to have been a bit of a confusion about 13the sequence of the Polish reports because there were, in 14fact, three. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. The one we have had is ---- 16MR RAMPTON: That is 1945. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- the 1945 zinc cover. 18MR RAMPTON: That is right, and the bag of hair. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: But there is Dawidowski as well? 20MR RAMPTON: No . My belief is -- no, I am cautious about this 21-- that the 1945 report was done at the request of 22Dawidowski. Then in 1990 there is a preliminary 23Markievitch report which we do not have and then in 1994 24there is what one might call the final Markievitch report, 25a part of which is in that first volume of the bundle 26I handed in yesterday.

. P-19

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. Mr Irving, I think that is right, 2that Mr Rampton should be able just to ask these 3supplementary questions about a new aspect of the case. 4MR RAMPTON: My Lord, I also make this request. Professor van 5Pelt has a family Bible which has been in his family since 6before the war. May he swear on that? 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. 8< PROFESSOR VAN PELT, sworn. 9<Examined by MR RAMPTON, QC.10MR RAMPTON: Professor van Pelt, are your full names Robert Jan 11van Pelt? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Have you made a report for the purposes of this case? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I have. 15Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Are you content that that report, save for some few 16questions which I shall ask you in a moment, shall stand 17as your evidence-in-chief in this case? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I am content. 19Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Do you confirm its accuracy so far as it contains 20statements of fact? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I do. 22Q.
[Mr Rampton]
And, so far as it contains expressions of opinion, do you 23confirm that those expressions of opinion are fair? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I do. 25Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Professor van Pelt, there is only one thing I want to ask 26you about. You heard what it was. Do you remember

. P-20

1yesterday that there was some discussion of the various 2Polish investigations of the fabric at Auschwitz and 3Birkenhau? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I remember. 5Q.
[Mr Rampton]
My Lord, may I lead on this? It is going to be much 6quicker. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sure we had the evidence yesterday. 8MR RAMPTON: Yes, we did. The first report was done in late 91945? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, it was. 11Q.
[Mr Rampton]
That we looked at yesterday, you remember, and that was 12the one which said that it had found traces of hydrogen 13cyanide in the zinc ventilation covers from crematorium 2? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 15Q.
[Mr Rampton]
You will have to say yes because you are recorded, you 16see. And also in a 25 and a half kilogram bag of hair? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 18Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Where was that hair found? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The hair was found in Canada I. 20Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Explain to his Lordship what Canada I is, will you? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Canada I was a part of the camp located halfway between 22Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II in what is now an industrial 23area, where property of people who had been admitted to 24the camp or had been gassed was kept for some time and it 25was sorted and prepared for transport to the Reichs. 26Unlike Canada II, which was located between the crematoria

. P-21

12, 3, 4 and 5, Canada I was not destroyed at the 2evacuation of the camp. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: So, just to be blunt about it, what is your 4inference as to how the cyanide came to be in the human 5hair? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think the logical conclusion is that the people from 7whom the hair came had been killed with cyanide. 8MR RAMPTON: And the hair removed after death? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And the hair removed afterwards, yes. 10Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Now, if we can whiz forward to the early 90s, was there a 11second Polish report done which we do not have? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is a little difficult to say if it is a real report 13since it was actually never completed or endorsed, as far 14as I know. What happened was that, more or less within 15months after Leuchter did his investigation in Auschwitz, 16the conservator at Auschwitz, Mr Smerk, together with the 17director decided to do their own investigation and they 18got help from people from the forensic laboratory in 19Cracow, the Jensen Institute, and a small investigation 20more or less on the model of the Leuchter investigation 21was done, which did confirm the Leuchter report in so far 22that it found high cyanide traces in the delousing rooms 23BW 5A and I think BW 5B. And much lower quantities 24I think in crematoria 2 or 3. 25Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Pause there, just so that it is all clear. BW 5A is in 26Birkenhau, in what became the women's camp?

. P-22

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. BW 5A means Bowerk 5A; it is a delousing 2installation in what is generally known as the women's 3camp in Birkenhau. 4Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Where is BW 5B? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is an opposite location slightly to the West of BW 5A. 6They are around 50 metres apart. 7Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Is it right that those are both brick built buildings? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
These are both brick buildings. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Do they have their roofs on them or not? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They have their roofs on them, yes. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: What puzzles me about this is that one of the 12documents Mr Irving just handed in says that this further 13Polish or Auschwitz investigation has been published in 14the summer 1991 Journal of Historical Review. 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. The history of that report was kind of a rude 16wake-up call for the people at Auschwitz museum, because 17what happened was that, one way or another, the document, 18which had not been finalized as far as I know, was leaked 19to people of the Institute of Historical Review and then 20immediately published rather triumphantly as a Polish 21investigation and/or sister Leuchter investigation. It 22was this kind of experience which then made both the 23people at the museum and the people at the Jansen 24institute to decide to move with greater care in the 25future. 26MR RAMPTON: Yes, pause there. Are you also familiar with

. P-23

1something called the Rudolf report? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am vaguely familiar with it. I have not read it in its 3entirety. 4Q.
[Mr Rampton]
How long is it? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
20 pages, something like that. 6Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Would you just have a look at this document? (Same 7handed) like your Lordship, I have not seen this before. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am just trying to work out what 9qualifications Dr Rudolf has. 10MR IRVING: My Lord, perhaps I can help you there. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: He is a chemist. 12MR IRVING: Rudolf is a chemist at the Max Bank Institute in 13Germany, which is one most prestigious research 14foundations. While he was there, he had a university 15degree in chemistry, he was working for his doctorate, he 16was halted in full tracks when he supplied an expertise 17for a court action in Germany, which resulted in demands 18from a certain community in Germany that he should be 19instantly dismissed, which was resisted by the Max Bank 20Institute. He was then dismissed, which brought to an end 21his chances of getting a doctorate. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is very helpful, thank you. 23MR RAMPTON: Would you look on the inside so that we can see 24what this is? I can tell you, Professor van Pelt, that 25this is not the Rudolf report. Can you look on the inside 26page? At the bottom there is a line and immediately under

. P-24

1the line we see this: "A German language edition of the 2complete Rudolf report, 120 A4 pages on gloss paper etc. 3etc., is now available for £8". If that be right, 4Professor van Pelt, we can be confident, can we not, that 5this is not the Rudolf report? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I presume so, if this disclaimer is placed at the 7copyright page. 8Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Tell me this. What do you know of Rudolf's conclusions 9concerning the residues, if any, of hydrogen cyanide in 10whatever compounds it was he tested for in, first of all, 11BW 5A -- if he went there? Did he? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think he went there, yes. 13Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What did he found in BW 5A? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would be hesitant to give any kind of definite opinion 15on this because it is a very long time ago that I read a 16gloss on the Rudolf report, but I think that he found that 17in substance the Leuchter results were substantiated by 18Rudolf, which means a high level of Prussian blue. 19Q.
[Mr Rampton]
So he tested for Prussian blue? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 21Q.
[Mr Rampton]
He found high residues in the delousing facility? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 23Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What did he find in the gas chambers at the crematoria? 24Did he go to crematoria 2 and 3? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I think so. 26Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What did he find there?

. P-25

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
As far as I remember, but again I have not consulted this 2report for a long time or the gloss on it, he did not find 3much there. 4Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Right. You have your report there, I think, that you made 5for this case? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
My report, yes. 7Q.
[Mr Rampton]
I am not going to read out any great amount of this. 8Could you turn to page 545? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have done so. 10Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Thank you. This is the passage, is it not, in which you 11discuss, first of all, what I might call the Markievitch 12prototype or provisional report, and then the Markievitch 13main report which I think came in 1994? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 15Q.
[Mr Rampton]
That has been published, has it? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Rampton]
In how many languages? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It was published in Polish and in English. 19Q.
[Mr Rampton]
I think you already told us that he Markievitch, or rather 20his team, went back and redid it, because they were 21unhappy about the first rather hurried or botched 22attempt. Is that right? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That were quite unhappy, yes, and they did the tests 24again. 25Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What substances or compounds did they test for? Did they 26test for Prussian blue?

. P-26

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I am not a chemist so forgive me if I am not going to 2give great detail on this. What I do know is that they 3found that the Prussian blue test was problematic and this 4was ---- 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I interrupt you just to make sure I am 6understanding? The Prussian blue is simply the physical 7manifestation of a chemical reaction caused by the acid in 8the cyanide, is that right? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
With iron. It is an iron compound and ultimately it is 10one of the things which can occur when you, for example, 11have hydrogen cyanide being applied to iron, but also 12other reactions can follow. 13MR RAMPTON: Can you just pause there? I want to take it 14slowly so that we are quite sure we understand so far as 15you are able to tell us because, as you say, you are not a 16chemist, what the reasons may be for what we are going to 17see in a moment. Can you turn to page 552? Page 553 18I hope is the opposite page. Is it? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, but I will be able to turn the page. 20Q.
[Mr Rampton]
We are lucky because we have them on facing pages. On the 21left-hand side of your report you have put a table with 22crematorium 2 at the top. Yes? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I have. 24Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Where did that come from? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I made the tables on the basis of the English language 26edition of the 1994 Markievitch report. The only change

. P-27

1I made was that I basically formatted all the tables in 2the same way because in the Markievitch report they were 3formatted differently. So I wanted that the way the 4information was going to be presented was going to be 5identical throughout the tables. 6Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Do you have the complete original of the Markievitch 7report here if anybody should want to look at it? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have one copy here. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Just put it down for the moment, please? 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Rampton, before plunging into these 11tables, would it be helpful for me to know what exactly it 12was that the revised Markievitch report decided or 13concluded? 14MR RAMPTON: That it concluded? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 16MR RAMPTON: Yes, all right. Will you tell his Lordship, 17Professor van Pelt, broadly speaking, what its findings 18were by reference, first, please to the crematoria and 19then to the delousing? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There were three parts to the Markievitch report. First 21of all, there was a test of the crematoria, was there 22really cyanide compound in the walls of the crematoria? 23Second of all, were there cyanide compounds in the 24delousing building BW 5A and the delousing building which 25was used in Auschwitz I? Then finally there was a test 26done with a control sample to see if in the building of

. P-28

1which they knew there had been no Zyklon B, and the idea 2was would there be a kind of random cyanide content in the 3walls, which was one of the claims which had been made 4about the cyanide contents in the crematoria. 5Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Pause there, and take that last feature first. What did 6they find when they looked in a place where there was 7neither gassing of humans nor of lice? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Negative. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Nothing? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Nothing. 11Q.
[Mr Rampton]
So that eliminates that. Where they were aware that it 12has been suggested that you could find it anywhere because 13at one stage during the typhus epidemic in 1942 the whole 14camp had been fumigated? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think so, yes. I do not remember exactly. 16Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What conclusion did they draw about that, do you know? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
About these buildings? 18Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Yes. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is pretty obvious. A single fumigation 20does not leave any cyanide presence. 21MR RAMPTON: That is what Markievitch said in his conclusion. 22Then if you look now at, first of all, we are going back 23to 551, and notice, please, that all these concentrations 24are given in micrograms per kilogram of cyanide compound, 25is that right? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes.

. P-29

1Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Is what is measured in micrograms the actual cyanide 2content of the samples? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that it is actually the combination. It is not 4the cyanide content, but I think the whole, whatever it 5has bonded with. 6Q.
[Mr Rampton]
If you look at the second table on page 551, it concerns 7crematorium 1. Do you see that? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
And only in one column, under sample 20 -- my Lord, the 10first block in the table is the number of the sample, and 11the second block is the readings beside B, the second row 12of blocks. Only in one, number 20, does one find 13significant quantities of cyanide. 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 15Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Then look over the page, please and look, please, at 553 16first. Now, samples 53 to 55, you tell us, were taken 17from blue staining on the outside of the building? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 19Q.
[Mr Rampton]
And two of those, 53A and 55, have relatively high 20readings, particularly number 55? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Rampton]
From 57 and 58 the readings, you tell us, are taken from 23the plaster, from dark blue stains on the inner side of 24the wall; in the building, in other words? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 26Q.
[Mr Rampton]
And both of those have relatively high readings, do they

. P-30

1not, particularly sample 57? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 3Q.
[Mr Rampton]
840, 792, 840. Then, please, look at the table on page 4552 and look at sample 25 which comes from crematorium 2. 5In the text on page 550 you tell us that samples 13 to 52 6were taken from places which served as homicidal gas 7chambers? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
So that includes the reading in the first table of 10crematorium 1, and it includes the readings under 11crematorium 2, does it not? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Rampton]
The first sample 25 under crematorium 2, has relatively 14high readings, does it not? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, it does. 16Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Not quite as high as sample 57 from the delousing 17building, but higher, I think, than any others in these 18tables? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 20Q.
[Mr Rampton]
30 and 31 also have what is medium high readings? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Crematorium 3, nothing of any significance, yes? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I agree. 24Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Crematorium 4, samples 41 and 46, particularly 41 again 25---- 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is crematorium 5.

. P-31

1MR RAMPTON: Yes, that is 4 and 5. In 4 again relatively high 2readings? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Do you have an explanation? I know you are not a chemist, 5but do you have an explanation, perhaps supplied to you by 6others, why it is that in these gas chamber remains 7Professor Markievitch's team found readings of cyanide 8which are almost as great as the Prussian blue readings in 9the delousing building? 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: He could read out page 555 of his report, 11could he not, on that? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I correct you there? Actually he did not test on 13Prussian blue. You just said the readings of Prussian 14blue. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: This is the analysis of the material as 16opposed to the colour? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. But he did not test Prussian blue because there are 18problems with Prussian blue analysis in this. 19MR RAMPTON: You say he did not test Prussian blue? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Markievitch did not test Prussian blue. 21Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Did not test Prussian blue? Do you know why not? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
One of the things which is very problematic, and again 23I am not speaking as a chemist, but I am speaking more or 24less on the basis of knowledge I have glossed from 25others. It seems that there is a problem in the formation 26of Prussian blue which relates to one of the main things,

. P-32

1the acidity of the environment. 2Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Wait a minute, take it in stages. None of us is a 3chemist. At least I am certainly not, I do not know about 4his Lordship, and I do not think Mr Irving is. Prussian 5blue is a compound? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Rampton]
A combination produced by a reaction between hydrogen 8cyanide and iron? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Is that right? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is right. 12Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Now, what is the difference between Prussian blue then and 13other substances which react with hydrogen cyanide? 14Sorry, it is a bad question. You were starting to talk 15about the acidity being a problem. What do you mean by 16that? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The PH level of the environment. 18Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Yes? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Prussian blue seems only to be formed in very, very 20specific conditions, in which a number of environmental 21factors need to be present. It seems to be that, in order 22for Prussian blue to be formed, one needs to have a PH 23level which is higher than 7. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can we cut this short? The PH level varied 25according to which chamber you were looking at, is that 26right?

. P-33

1MR RAMPTON: No, my Lord. 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Very particularly in the case of the gas chambers the PH 3level would have been much lower than 7, because of the 4carbon dioxide being brought into the environment by 5people who are brought into the gas chambers. 6Q.
[Mr Rampton]
So an acidity or a PH lower than about 6, high acidity, 7yes? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Is this that you are telling us interferes in such a way 10with the chemistry that the hydrogen cyanide does not 11react with iron? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Going back to what you were being asked 14about, namely the conclusions to be drawn from the 15readings which Mr Rampton has just taken you through, am 16I right, just to short circuit it again, that at page 555 17of your report you in a few sentences summarise what the 18conclusion of Markievitch report was? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I do, and the conclusion was that it was a positive 20proof that the spaces in the crematoria they had tested 21had been used with Zyklon B, hydrogen cyanide had been 22brought in those rooms, and I would like to make maybe one 23kind of caveat to this whole report, and this is if you 24allow me? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is a problem which relates to crematoria 4 and 5, and

. P-34

1this is a problem which goes back to the Leuchter report. 2It goes back to any tests which have been done. That is 3the fact that the crematoria 4 and 5 which are above 4ground buildings, brick buildings on a concrete slab were 5completely demolished at the end of the war, and that all 6the bricks were brought to a big heap behind crematorium 75, and that whatever we see there now has been 8reconstructed with those bricks, but that these bricks in 9some way come from a random pile. So it is very difficult 10to know which brick was originally where. 11MR RAMPTON: So the reading on page 552 on crematoria 4 and 5, 12the relatively high readings, numbers 41 and 46, there is 13no way of being able to say that those pieces of fabric 14that are now in what is supposed to be the gas chambers 15were there originally? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, there is no way one can say that. So I would say that 17any investigation of crematoria 4 or 5 on residual 18hydrogen content would be, as far as I am concerned, a 19useless exercise. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: So we concentrate on the other crematoria? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 22MR RAMPTON: But the same problem does not beset the samples 23taken from crematorium 2. Thank you very much, Professor 24van Pelt. 25 My Lord, before cross-examination starts, 26I should have done this earlier, your Lordship has I hope

. P-35

1a supplemental or supplementary report from Professor van 2Pelt? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: I remember that there was one. 4MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving certainly has it. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am just wondering where I put it. 6MR RAMPTON: It has to do with a very limited topic. It has to 7do with B Zyklon deliveries to Auschwitz. What I will do, 8if your Lordship does not mind, is hand up a file with it 9in, which I have marked "van Pelt supplementary". 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think I have it, although I am a bit 11puzzled I have not put it in the existing file. 12MR RAMPTON: That there is not much room is perhaps one reason. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: That could be true. It suggests to me that I 14perhaps have not had it. 15MR RAMPTON: I am not going to refer to it now. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you have seen this supplemental 17report? 18MR IRVING: I have indeed, my Lord. 19MR RAMPTON: My Lord, also in the file, which Mr Irving does 20not know about but I have a copy for him now, is a 21document produced in consequence of a critique that 22Mr Irving published on his web site of Professor van 23Pelt's book about Auschwitz. I suggested that it would be 24helpful for me if Professor van Pelt did answer to that 25critique which he has recently done and I have got, in 26case he was cross-examined on the basis of the critique.

. P-36

1It emerged from the questions that I asked Mr Irving 2yesterday that that indeed is going to be so. It seems to 3me, since this is quite detailed, that everybody therefore 4should have a copy. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well maybe. I just am a little concerned 6that every day we are generating more files. We have 7enough files to keep most people happy for a long time. 8MR RAMPTON: It is not something I am suggesting anybody should 9read from beginning to end, but Professor van Pelt may 10want, as experts do, make reference to it for the detail. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we slot it into the same file. 12MR RAMPTON: I have done it. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. 14MR RAMPTON: I have called it "van Pelt supplementary 2 and 3". 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am going to put the Rudolf report into J as 16well. 17MR RAMPTON: Yes, my Lord, that must be right. Miss Rogers 18thinks it is about ten. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have to keep a track on it, actually. 20<Cross-examined by MR IRVING21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, Mr Irving? 22MR IRVING: My Lord, may I propose to proceed as follows with 23the cross-examination? That I briefly cross-examine the 24witness as to credit; I would then like to test your 25Lordship's patience by showing the court for about ten 26minutes a video film of Professor van Pelt visiting the

. P-37

1Auschwitz site, which will serve a double purpose. There 2are things which he says during that video and it will 3also give us a sense of what the site looks like now. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Certainly. I am afraid I have not noticed 5the video, but certainly do. 6MR IRVING: I will then proceed after that to the court 7examination. Professor van Pelt, you are a Dutch citizen 8or Canadian citizen now? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am a Dutch citizen. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
May I, first of all, pardon my rudeness, welcome you to 11our country and say what a great pleasure I had in reading 12your book on Auschwitz -- for what it is worth, it is one 13of the few books that I have read from cover to cover and 14it was a book that I found very difficult to put down. 15I do not know how much of the book was written by you and 16I do not know how much of the book was written by your 17partner, Deborah Dwork. However, a number of questions 18arise from the book and, after we have seen the video, 19I would ask you just in one paragraph to give the court a 20brief history of Auschwitz in the way you have done in the 21book so admirably on the basis of documentation. You 22studied at the University of Leiden, am I correct? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I did. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
And you are now Professor of the History of Architecture 25at the University of Waterloo in Toronto? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. The issue of my appointment is kind of confusing.

. P-38

1I am in the Department of Architecture and hence I am 2officially a Professor of Architecture. Your title as 3Professor depends on the department you are in. However, 4I teach in what we call the Cultural History stream, so 5normally, in order to prevent confusion in ordinary usage, 6I would call myself Professor of Cultural History because, 7both in my background, my PhD and my teaching duties, 8I teach cultural history in the architectural school. 9However, when I was advised about the way I had to create 10my curriculum vitae for this proceeding, I was told that 11I had been to be extremely precise in the legal sense of 12what I was, so again I put in Professor of Architecture. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: So you are really a cultural historian? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am really a cultural historian. 15MR IRVING: This is a point of some substance, my Lord. We 16need to know precisely what your qualifications are to 17offer your expertise to the court. I do not mean this in 18the least sense in a derogatory manner because, as I say, 19I have read both your book and your report with the utmost 20interest. However, we need to know what your areas of 21expertise actually are. In Britain, of course, we have 22the Royal Institute of British Architects. Are you 23familiar with the fact that it is illegal in England to 24call yourself an architect unless you are registered with 25the RIBA? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is in most countries like that, yes, I know.

. P-39

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
In Holland, the equivalent is the Bond van Nederlandse 2Architecten, am I correct? I am sorry about my 3pronunciation. 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, Bond van Nederlandse Architecten. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which is the rough equivalent of the RIBA? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Am I right in saying that you are not registered with the 8Bond van Nederlandse Architecten? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have never had any reason to do so since I never studied 10in an architectural school. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you cannot legally pretend to be an architect, if I can 12put it like that? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I could be prosecuted. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
You could be prosecuted? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 16Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Rather like Mr Leuchter was prosecuted in Massachusetts 17for pretending to be an engineer? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
You can probably see the thrust of this particular 20question. In other words, your expertise, as an 21architect, is the same as Mr Leuchter's expertise was an 22engineer? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not really know. I have been teaching in 24architecture school now since 1984. I have taught design 25courses, specially in small architecture schools one needs 26to chip in wherever one does. I have been on

. P-40

1architectural juries and quick sessions, mostly on a 2weekly, bi-weekly, kind of frequency. I did ---- 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
You have never learned architecture? You have never 4studied architecture at university? You have never taken 5a degree in architecture? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not have a degree in it, but I have been confronted 7with the architectural practice and, apart from that, 8I have worked for various architects, one of them, Sir 9Dennis Leston, here in England, when he was designing the 10Synagogue in Jerusalem. I have worked with Jack Diamond 11in Toronto. So I have been in architectural offices very 12often and other practices. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
And, of course, you are now advising the present Auschwitz 14authorities on the reconstruction, if I can put it like 15that, of the Auschwitz site? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I was advising them, yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are no longer doing so. Very well. So if I am called 18a pseudo historian, then you are a pseudo architect, if I 19can put it like that? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, except I have never claimed to be either an architect 21or a pseudo architect. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Except that you are a Professor of architecture, you 23announce you are a Professor architecture, you leave 24people with the impression that you are an expert on 25architecture, and yet you have never studied it and you 26have never qualified and you are not registered as such?

. P-41

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I must say that I probably would prefer to be called a 2Professor of cultural history, but the fact of the matter 3is that the university has given me an appointment as 4Professor of architecture. So ---- 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you are not giving evidence here on the culture of 6Auschwitz; you are giving evidence on the architecture of 7Auschwitz. 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am going to evidence, I hope, on the history of 9Auschwitz, and the architectural documents are a very 10important historical source. I think we both agree on 11that. I think, as an historian, you can talk about 12various forms of evidence and the architectural documents 13is one of these forms of evidence. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
I do not mean these questions in the least sense as a put 15down, but I think it is important to draw his Lordship's 16attention to the fact that your qualifications as an 17architect are, in fact, no greater or lesser than mine? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I agree that my formal qualifications are exactly the same 19as yours. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
So when you look at light switches or architectural 21drawings or blue prints, as you call them, you are no 22better qualified than I am? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, but I would say, your Lordship, that I have been doing 24this for the past maybe 15 years, and so there is a 25certain practical experience, I would say, which may be is 26going to be relevant.

. P-42

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. There is only one other very general question on the 2question of credit which I would ask you before we settle 3back and watch the 10 minute video. Your report is 4unusual in one respect, and your Lordship may have noticed 5it, it has a copyright line on page 2. In other words, 6you claim copyright in this document. Now, remembering 7you are on oath, would you tell the court if you have 8any intention eventually of publishing this? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
At the moment I do not have. I think it is an 10unpublishable document. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
I disagree. It is set out in chapter form. It has 12literary quotations at the beginning of every chapter, 13quotations from Mediaeval poets and other authors in a way 14you do not normally find in an expert report, I would have 15thought. I would have thought it was designed explicitly 16for publication at some future date? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. When the occasion would arise, I would be very 18pleased if some of the things could be used, but I have 19learned to respect a big difference, for example, between 20a Ph.D. dissertation and a book and there is a big 21difference between an expert report, and I understand this 22report as a means for an intelligent judge to make up his 23mind about Auschwitz who has never been there, which is 24quite a difference for when one writes a book for the 25general public. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
So why the copyright line?

. P-43

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Oh, it is a habit of mine which I do whenever I submit any 2manuscript to anyone, and maybe this is inappropriate in 3this case. None of the lawyers has told me that it was 4inappropriate, so the copyright line remained there. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: You can have an argument about the copyright 6after this case is over. 7MR IRVING: My Lord, the reason I ask this, of course, if the 8witness was intending to publish this work, and he has now 9said on oath he has no intention of publishing it, then 10I would ask him the following question. (To the witness): 11If you were to write a report which came out with the 12conclusion that crematorium No. (ii) had never been used 13as a homicidal gas chamber, that Auschwitz was not a 14factory of death, that Leuchter was right, David Irving 15was right, whatever, what would the commercial prospects 16of that be as compared with the commercial prospects of 17the report that you have actually written? Would they be 18greater or less? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is difficult to say. It seems to be that the book 20buying habits of the people who are believing that the gas 21chambers were not used for homicidal purposes seems to 22have been much more active than for the people who 23believed that they were used for homicidal purposes. 24After all, I think that you sell more books than I sell of 25my Auschwitz books. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not currently I do not.

. P-44

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I mean, it is very difficult to say this. Certainly, 2controversy seems to have served you well in the past in a 3number of books. I have been, I believe, in some way less 4controversial and controversy certainly helps sales 5figures in general, so I probably put some more books. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. I will take your statement that you have no 7intention of publishing this ever, as you have now told 8the court. My Lord ---- 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I just come back to this? I said "in this form". 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Quite briefly, if you would. 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Sorry? 12Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Quite briefly, if you would. 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I said "in this form". I did not -- I did not write 14this with publication in mind as such. 15MR IRVING: Yes. Very well. My Lord if your Lordship will 16turn to the transcript ---- 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Play the video? 18MR IRVING: --- which I provide your Lordship of the video, 19just so you can confirm what is actually said. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let me find it. Is that one of the documents 21you have handed in. 22MR IRVING: It is called Mr Truth -- Mr Death. There are two 23excerpts that I wish to play. 24(The video was played)25MR IRVING: My Lord, this is Fred Leuchter. My Lord, I think 26this is not the part I wanted in fact. I would speed the

. P-45

1court along, I think, if I ask the witness if he remembers 2what was said. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not your fault. Shall we turn it off? 4MR IRVING: Yes. If I could borrow a transcript from someone? 5Professor van Pelt, you remember appearing in a video 6which is part of a film now called "Mr Death". Do you 7remember the filming of that project? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
When exactly was that filmed? A year ago? Half a year 10ago? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We went to Auschwitz in April 1998 -- was it 1998? 1999, 12I think. 1999. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
'98? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
1999. No, 1998. I am sorry. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you remember saying: "Auschwitz is like the Holy of 16Holies. I have prepared for years to go there, and have a 17fool come in, coming completely unprepared, it is 18sacrilege, somebody who walks into the Holy of Holies and 19doesn't give a damn"? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I remember saying that. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
This was a reference to Mr Leuchter, was it not? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, it was a reference to Mr Leuchter. 23MR RAMPTON: Should not the witness have a transcript like 24everybody else? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do you feel the need for a transcript? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I remember the -- it is useful, but I remember this.

. P-46

1MR RAMPTON: Except that some pages down the road we come to 2some German, so it might be helpful. 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Thank you. 4MR IRVING: You were deeply moved to visit the actual location 5where these atrocities had occurred? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
More than moved. I was frightened. I ---- 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Ghosts of the dead were still all around? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not believe in ghosts and I have never seen in 9ghosts in Auschwitz, but it is an awesome place in many 10ways, and it is also an awesome responsibility one takes 11upon oneself when one starts to engage this place as an 12historian. For many years I felt I was not up to that 13task. It was only after very careful preparation that 14I finally decided to go there and to start work in 15Auschwitz. As many things in life, it became easier to 16work on it as I was there as you actually start 17confronting what the place is. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I ask you about a part on the next page of the 19transcript, the page beginning with the words, "Very 20little left", "to suddenly have in that room that 21concentration of evidence, you are sitting in the 22archives, to actually hold the stamps in your hand which 23you see on the drawings". Am I right in understanding 24that the Auschwitz archives have the original wartime 25rubber stamps still? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, there is a box with all the rubber stamps.

. P-47

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
You yourself took one of the stamps and you put it on an 2ink pad and tried it out on one of your note pads? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
You had exactly the same stamp that had been used by 5architects like Dejaco and Ertl and the rest? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I made a copy of that stamp. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
You could have had a lot of fun with one of those stamps, 8could you not, if you had so chosen? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If one wants to falsify evidence, one could have fun, yes, 10but... 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think that suggestion is being made, 12is it? 13MR IRVING: Well, my Lord ---- 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: That was lighthearted or was it not? 15MR IRVING: --- I wanted to leave that lingering suspicion in 16your Lordship's mind. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, it is better to come out with it if you 18are going to make that allegation. 19MR IRVING: We referred to one document yesterday, my Lord, the 20one on cremation rate capacities, and I strongly implied 21that this document is suspect. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: But not originating from Professor van Pelt? 23MR IRVING: Good Lord, no. For heaven's sake, no. I deeply 24regret that that impression should have been given. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, I just wanted to clarify that. 26MR IRVING: Of course not. It is just that if those rubber

. P-48

1stamps had been in a Polish archive which was Communist 2until quite recently, in the Auschwitz State Museum, 3rattling around in a cardboard box ---- 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Somebody could do it. 5MR IRVING: --- somebody could have done it. Rubber stamps 6played a great part in the falsification of the 7Demanuke(?), identity card, and the final revealing of the 8falsification. (To the witness): You continue to say at 9the bottom of that paragraph: "This is like holding the 10weapon of destruction in my hand, the gun that killed the 11victim, except these blue prints did not kill one person. 12They ultimately allowed for the killing of millions." Are 13you saying that several million people were killed in 14Auschwitz or was this just a loose turn of phrase? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This would be a loose turn of phrase. I believe that 16Dr Pieper's assessment that round a million people were 17killed in Auschwitz is probably the most probable number. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
So when you talk about millions, it is not a deliberate 19manipulation or a perverse distortion of figures. It is 20just a loose approximation because you are speaking 21without a script? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. First of all, I am speaking without a script. 23I mean, you know exactly how Errol Morris interviews 24people because you were interviewed in the same way and 25also appear in the same movie. I was talking without of 26any of blue prints there. I was talking in studio for

. P-49

1three or four days. 2 There is, however, one point which I would like 3to make, and that when I came to the archive and saw for 4the first time these blueprints, I had very clearly in my 5mind a scene from Shawa(?) where the great historian Wal 6Hoeberg holds in his hand at that moment a railway table 7of transports to Treblinka, and he says something to the 8effect that it was looking at these documents that, in 9fact, you were holding the murder weapon in your hand; and 10I certainly, when I was talking to Errol and when I was 11looking at these blue prints, it was really amazing how 12Errol brought back to me that that moment, that first 13moment, of seeing the blue prints, that I was thinking 14this is part of that whole administrative system. It is 15not only blue prints for Auschwitz, but it is basically 16part of a State sponsored project to kill Jews. So when 17I used to use the word "millions" here, I would be quite 18happy to ultimately defend it in that larger context of a 19bureaucracy at work to ultimately dispose of people. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor van Pelt, would you agree that it is the duty of 21historians to remain completely unemotional when he is 22looking at any object or artifact or a document, and to 23interpret it as unemotionally and neutrally as he can? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that one's duty is to be unemotional, to be 25objective, but one's duty is also, I think, to remain 26human in the exercise. I think, and this is what I just

. P-50

1told you before, my Lord, that I prepared for Auschwitz 2because ultimately I went there as a human being and I was 3frightened to go there and I was frightened for the 4responsibility. 5 To actually face great historical questions when 6they concern, as one would say, maybe the alleged murder 7of many people, then I think that, of course, if one is 8completely without emotion as one looks at these 9documents, then one would be a machine and probably not a 10human being and hence not a historian. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. We can establish very clearly that you are an 12historian with feelings (and I think we would all like to 13be that), but do you not agree it is important as an 14historian to be able to put his feelings in one 15compartment and his objectivity in another and not allow 16his objectivity to become coloured by his feelings? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I agree that when one analyses a document that one should, 18indeed, be objective, that one should forget one's 19feelings, but when one goes home in the evening and goes 20back to a little room in the town to Vochest(?) where 21I had rented a room, then, of course, the feelings will 22come back. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
I agree. Now if I can turn just to the last page but one 24of the transcript. I am afraid they are not numbered, but 25it is the paragraph beginning with the 01, "Van Pelt then 26says"?

. P-51

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Sorry, the last 0, yes. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
I quote: "Crematorium (ii)", and at this moment when you 3are saying this, you are actually standing on the 4collapsed roof of crematorium (ii)? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am standing there? 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
On the roof, yes. You are crouching on it by a hole. It 7is visible in the video. 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think I am standing on the roof at this -- it was 9Leuchter who was crouching at the hole, not me. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. You say: "In any case, crematorium (ii) is 11the most [something] of Auschwitz. In the 2500 square 12feet of this one room", and you are pointing downwards, 13"more people lost their lives than in any other place on 14this planet. 500,000 people were killed. If you would 15draw a map of human suffering, if you create a geography 16of atrocities, this would be the absolute centre." 17 That is a reference to crematorium (ii) and you 18are standing on the roof of Leichenkeller No. 1? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is a reference to crematorium (ii), but I am actually 20not in the picture. It is Fred Leuchter standing on the 21roof of Leichenkeller 1. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you are speaking yourself? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But I am speaking. This was taped in the studio and there 24is no image of me actually in the whole movie near 25crematorium (ii). The only -- there are only two parts in 26the movie where I am actually seen in Birkenhau, apart

. P-52

1from, I think -- no, BW 51 was cut, that is, I look over 2the undressing room of crematorium (iii) at one moment and 3I am seen in the ruins of crematorium (v), and that is it. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor, just so that we can be completely clear about 5this and the record can be clear, you are describing 6crematorium (ii) as being the place where 500,000 people 7were killed or ---- 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
--- give or take a few numbers. 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
And that this was the centre of the atrocity? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
So if I am to concentrate a large part of my investigation 14in this cross-examination on that one building and, in 15fact, on Leichenkeller 1, the one arm of the crematorium, 16this is not entirely unjustified if I am trying to 17establish that the factories of death did not exist as 18such? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I think that that the obvious building to challenge 20would be crematorium (ii). 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
My Lord, may I show the witness one or two of these 22photographs so we can identify what we are talking about? 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. 24MR IRVING: It will probably help your Lordship also. This, 25first of all, is quite a large photograph showing the 26whole Auschwitz region. If I hold it up, could you point,

. P-53

1please, to Birkenhau? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Birkenhau is right here. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Birkenhau, so his Lordship can also see it, is the 4oblong. The witness recognizes the oblong in the centre 5of the map. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, will you pause a second because 7this is quite helpful to me because there is a map 8somewhere in Professor van Pelt's? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is in my report, yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
I would quite like to mark it up because the geography is 11not all that clear in my mind. 12MR RAMPTON: It may be your Lordship will do even better with 13the aerial photographs taken by the Allies in 1944 which 14are at tab 2 of K2. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. 16MR RAMPTON: They go everywhere from a bird's eye view, as it 17were, of the whole complex right through to the detail of 18the roof of Leichenkellers 2 and 3. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much, Mr Rampton. That is 20very helpful. 21MR IRVING: Would you now point to Auschwitz 1, what is also 22called the "stammlager"? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Auschwitz 1 is a kind of more, the stammlager, the 24compound which is surrounded by barbed wired is right 25here, but here we see an extension of the stammlager 26called the "schutzhaftlager erweiterung". It is under

. P-54

1construction. Here are various factories, including 2Canada 1, which belong to the stammlager but which are 3outside the barbed wire compound. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Am I holding the map the right way up, Professor? Which 5way is north, can you remember? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
North is right here, so it should go like that. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Right. Finally, the big IG Monovitz plant? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is more or less where your hand -- yes, more or less 9where your hand is. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is that not the IG Monovitz plant here? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, no, this is the schutzhaftlager -- where your hand is, 12more or less where your hand is, that is where the 13Monovitz... 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
So Monovitz is down here somewhere? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, down there. Sorry, that will be kind of confusing 16for the record, but there is another photo in the binder 17which actually also shows the plant. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
In fact, if one looks closely at this photograph, one can 19see a cluster of bombs descending from the American 20aircraft that took the photograph. We now get much 21closer, if I may? 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Rampton, can you give me the reference in 23the Leuchter (sic) report for the aerial photographs? 24MR RAMPTON: In the Leuchter report? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Sorry, in the van Pelt report. 26MR RAMPTON: To what, my Lord?

. P-55

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: The aerial photographs because I have marked 2up one of them and I cannot actually find the -- rather 3than start again with another one. 4MR RAMPTON: It is towards the end, I think. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I thought it was. I am so sorry. Will 6you forgive me, Mr Irving, just tracking this down? 7MR RAMPTON: If your Lordship were to start at 370? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Page 49 does show the plant just referred to. 9MR IRVING: Very well. These two buildings down here, the T 10shaped buildings, they are the two crematoria (ii) and 11(iii), is that correct? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is correct. May I make one kind of caveat as far as 13the numbering is concerned? There are documents where 14these crematoria called (i) and (ii), so sometimes they 15are called (ii) and (iii), sometimes (i) and (ii). It 16depends if one crematorium (i) in the stammlager is 17included in the numeral. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
We have here, my Lord, a photograph taken relatively 19recently, within the last few months, from a helicopter 20showing the site as it now is of these two crematoria, the 21ruins of the two crematoria. You can see the outline of 22the two T shaped buildings like they are mirror images of 23each other. Crematorium (ii), is that correct? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, that is correct. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Crematorium (iii), and they are largely in ruins. What is 26this path that has been laid here? Was that a wartime

. P-56

1path, Professor? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, that is a recent path that has just been created 3because many of the tourists go first to the former 4women's camp and then they go through a new bridge and a 5new opening through the barbed wire fence which surrounds 6crematorium (ii) to crematorium (ii). 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
While we are just looking at this map, you mentioned the 8word "tourist". Is Auschwitz a major tourist attraction, 9therefore? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
At the moment, the tourism has been reduced in past years 11because it used to be that the Polish Government insisted 12that all Polish school children would go there. That has 13changed. So I think that around 500,000 people per year 14come there. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Whilst we are holding this particular map, can you 16identify what these two circular objects are? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
These are part of a sewage treatment plant. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
A water purification plant? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes -- no, a sewage treatment plant. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, it is the same thing. It converts sewage into 21drinkable water? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. This was not meant to convert sewage into drinkable 23water. This was created, and we see another one right 24here, and there was another one started right there, 25because there were complaints in 1942 when the Birkenhau 26population started to increase by the authorities in the

. P-57

1province of Upper Silesia that the camp was throwing its 2untreated sewage in the Zola River. So what happened was 3that the building inspectors of the county said, "If you 4want to continue to run this concentration camp, you have 5to take care that you throw cleaned water or the clean 6sewage into the river". 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
While we are dealing with the water, this is crematorium 8(ii), this is the Leichenkeller No. 1 -- we will come back 9to that in a minute on a larger photograph -- am 10I correct? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is the water treatment plant? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is a water treatment plant. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
If eight kilogrammes of cyanide were put into the water 15system there, of that particular building, it would not do 16the water treatment plant any good? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Sorry, this is a sewage treatment plant. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but if it was to be established that there was a link 19between that building and the sewage treatment plant, the 20drainage of the one building went into the sewage 21treatment plant, then this would create a serious problem 22for the environment, eight kilogrammes on a regular basis 23of hydrogen cyanide being fed ---- 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I cannot comment on how much cyanide -- how 25quickly cyanide would be diluted. Certainly, a sewage 26treatment plant is taking many kinds of refuse in its

. P-58

1operation. One would have to talk to a chemist what 2ultimately the kind of danger of the dilution of hydrogen 3cyanide would be, but we must not forget that most of the 4hydrogen cyanide in the Leichenkeller 1 was used as a gas 5and was evacuated through a chimney and not through the 6floor. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. But we have heard that it is a heavier than 8air gas? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. It is slightly lighter. It is not much lighter. It 10rises slowly, but there was a large ventilation system in 11the crematorium and there was an exhaust pipe on top of 12the crematorium through which the air in the Leichenkeller 131 or gas chamber could be evacuated. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
While we are looking at this particular map, will you show 15us, please, the railroad spur which ends between the two 16crematorium? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We see the end of the railroad spur right there. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which is the platform, therefore, where the notorious 19selections are said to have taken place? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is the end of the platform where the selections took 21place. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
So they would be marched off then -- what happened to the 23people who arrived by train on that railroad platform? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
What happened to them? 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: That was a question.

. P-59

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
A selection took place at a particular point halfway, that 2platform, and this is, we are now talking about a 3situation in 1944, since the spur was only completed in 41944 for the Hungarian action, and the most usual 5operation was that the selection took place halfway, that 6platform, in which men and women were lined up in four 7rows. One row of women to the east and a line of women to 8the west of that point, and two lines of men, again one to 9the east and one to the west, and right in the centre 10selection took place and then people were either sent into 11the camp or sent to the crematorium. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: My impression is that a similar, the spur may 13not have been there, selection process operated during 141943 as well, did it not? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The section process in 1943 was different since it 16happened at the so-called Judens rampe. A Juden rampe 17was, basically, an unloading point along the main railway 18corridor. I can point it out on this aerial photo. This 19is the main railway corridor connecting, basically, Vienna 20and there is one going to Berlin here and Cracow and 21Warsaw; and exactly at this point, at this point, there 22are still the remains also of a rampe, a platform, where 23the trains with Jews would be unloaded and then a 24selection took place here. Then people who were admitted 25to the camp walked to the camp and the people who were 26selected to die, if they still could walk, would walk, but

. P-60

1otherwise were taken on trucks to the gas chambers of the 2crematoria or the gas chambers of bunker 1 and 2. 3MR IRVING: May I ask you some questions about that selection 4process now, please? On what basis was the selection for 5life or death conducted? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It would depend really on the situation. The policies of 7the Germans seem to have been different at different 8times. To give one example, as a general rule, let us 9first say for a general rule, one could say that, as far 10as gentiles was concerned, and gentiles were sent to 11Auschwitz, there was no selection on arrival. For 12example, Poles, a large group of Polish children came to 13Auschwitz from the Zamoska area and were admitted to the 14camp, and you can go to the present women's camp and there 15are barracks specially for children with paintings and the 16bits of school, and so on. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
At what age does one cease to be a child? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
In Auschwitz, I would say around 12 or 13 years. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
What age was Anne Frank when she arrived in Auschwitz? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Oh, she would have been 15. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
About 15? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. Did she fall ill in Auschwitz? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think so. I think she fell ill when she came to 25Bergen-Belsen. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did any members of her family fall in Auschwitz and where

. P-61

1they housed in a hospital in Auschwitz, her father or her 2sister, Margot? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Her mother fell ill and ultimately died, and her father 4fell ill and was admitted to the Lazarett. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So these were six Jews, unemployable six Jews, who were 6housed in the hospital in Auschwitz? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but again one -- as I started to give my original 8presentation, my Lord, and maybe I can finish it? 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, we will come back to Anne Frank if you 10want to. You have dealt with ---- 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like ---- 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
He was dealing with the various ways in which the 13selection process occurred. If it was non-Jews, then 14there was no selection process. That is as far as you 15have got. 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There was no selection process. If it were Jews, then it 17depends on which town we are speaking of and what is the 18kind of transport that arrived. For example, in early 191942 transports arrived of Jews who were sent to Auschwitz 20under the umbrella of what is called the Operation Schmelt 21which was a local work programme for Jews in Upper 22Silesia. 23 There the selection took place at the factories 24and people who could not work any more in the Operation 25Schmelt were sent to Jews and were killed there without 26selection. So there was no selection there in Auschwitz.

. P-62

1Selection had happened somewhere else. 2 In general, what happened was that transports 3arrived and sometimes transport arrived in Auschwitz where 4again the selection had taken place somewhere else. For 5example, the Slovac transport which arrived in 1942, most 6of the early Slovac transports were Jews who had already 7been selected back in Slovakia in transits camps as being 8fit for work in Auschwitz. No selection was applied to 9these transports. 10 Then at a certain moment transports start to 11arrive where no selection takes place at the point of 12departure, and then the selection will take place in 13Auschwitz, where again the situation can be different. 14Sometimes all children and all old people are selected to 15die and younger people are selected to live, but again 16there are exceptions. 17MR IRVING: May I interrupt you at this point and ask you what 18is the documentary basis for these remarks you have been 19making over the last two or three minutes? Is it all 20eyewitness evidence or are there any documents at all in 21the captured archives to support this, any document 22whatsoever? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The main source of this is eyewitness evidence. There are 24documents which talk about that, that transport arrives 25and only so many arbeitsfahige Juden have been admitted to 26the camp, which means Jews were fit to work. It does not

. P-63

1specify the fate of the others. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
So far as the documents go, we are left in suspense as to 3what happens to them and we rely entirely on the 4eyewitness evidence of those left behind, so to speak, as 5to what happened to their loved, nearest and dearest? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is obvious that, when a transport of, let us say, 2,000 7Jews arrived and only 900 or 600 people are committed to 8camp, of course the question is raised what happens to the 9other people. Then at that moment I think eyewitness 10testimony, both from Jews and Germans, becomes quite valid 11as a historical source. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: You get the disparity between those two 13figures from the numbers given on the documents relating 14to the trains that were arriving at Auschwitz? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 16MR IRVING: So, in other words, we are reliant entirely on the 17eyewitness testimony? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We do not rely entirely. We know at a certain movement 19that so many people arrived, so many people were 20considered fit for work and then, of course, there are the 21registration numbers. There is a great disparity between 22what we know about the number of transports arrived there 23and the number of Jews who worked at Auschwitz, and the 24number of people who were registered there, because, with 25two exceptions again, registration happened consecutively, 26which means a number that had been given out once was not

. P-64

1given out a second time. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is the total number of registration numbers that we 3know about in Auschwitz, in round figures? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Around 400,000. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So around 400,000 of these hapless people arrived in 6Auschwitz, were given registration numbers and officially 7existed, and the rest had no registration numbers and they 8just were disposed of in some way. Is that what you are 9saying? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but as to how they were disposed of, alas, the 12archives tell us nothing, neither the Moscow archives nor 13the Polish archives. We are reliant on eyewitness 14testimony and on our own common sense? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And at a certain moment a careful investigation of the 16machinery of murder, in this case the crematoria. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which comes back to crematorium number 2 effectively? 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think the Professor wants to add 19something. 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like maybe to complete my account of selection. 21There are one or two other categories, I think, that 22I need to mention before we close on this. 23MR IRVING: We have not closed on it. We are going to come 24back to it. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let him finish with the various 26categorisations.

. P-65

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I must mention that, for example, in 1943 and 1944 a 2number of Jews transports arrived from Theresienstadt 3where none of these people were selected, with children 4and old people were housed in what is called a 5Theresienstadt lager in Auschwitz, so Jews' children at 6that time were admitted to Auschwitz, and also old 7people. That was part of a camouflage action by the SS 8because they feared, or they expected, a Red Cross 9inspection of Theresienstadt and wanted to be able to 10account for the people who had been sent to Auschwitz. 11MR IRVING: What is your documentary basis for making that 12statement? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The documentary basis? 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
For making the statement that this transport arrived from 15Theresienstadt, that it was properly housed in Auschwitz 16and the Theresienstadt camp, and that the reason for that 17was to prepare camouflage against the Red Cross 18inspection? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have to rely here on the historians of Auschwitz. I 20have not studied the history of the Theresienstadt Jews 21myself. I rely here on people like Atler, who has written 22the definitive history of the Theresienstadt ghetto. 23I have not done any specific research into the history of 24Theresienstadt lager. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
While we are talking about the histories of Auschwitz, do 26you agree that there is a high degree of politicization of

. P-66

1the writing of history about camps like Auschwitz. If 2I can put it like that? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
To be very honest, I have always been surprised how little 4politicization there has been. In general, I must say 5that, with the exception of the number of victims, I find 6Jan Sehn's history still remarkably useful. You know Jan 7Sehn wrote his history in 1945/46. I have been very 8impressed in general by the professionalism of the 9historians at Auschwitz, and in general I must say that 10for the people who have looked seriously at this camp I do 11not have too many complaints. Now, it is of course true 12that new source material has become available and new 13historical questions have been asked. I think one of the 14reasons that you were so interested in my book was because 15I introduced a lot of new kind of evidence about the 16history of the camp. But in general I must say that 17I think that most people have acted very responsibly, and 18with very few kinds of political prejudices in relation to 19the history of Auschwitz. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
The site of Auschwitz has not really changed very much 21since the end of World War II, apart from the barracks 22being torn down and recycled. Can you explain to the 23court, please, why it is that in the very earliest 24references to Auschwitz, published by the Russians after 25the capture of the camp in January 1945, there is no 26reference whatsoever to the discovery of gas chambers, but

. P-67

1any number of references to other atrocities being 2committed there? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like to comment on the document, but I would like 4it see it in front of me. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that, if we are going to interpret in this case an 7historical source, we should go carefully and slowly. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think that is fair. 9MR IRVING: That is quite fair, my Lord, and tomorrow, with 10your Lordship's permission, I will bring the translation 11of the appropriate account. Can you explain also why the 12New York Times, in its account published in April 1945, 13referred to 5 million people having been exterminated in 14the camp? This is at the other end of the extreme. 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like to see it before I comment. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I can do that now if you give it to me or I can do it 18later. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
I have another New York Times item here. New York Times, 20November 25th 1947, I will be happy to show it to you. 21I will read it out. It is a very brief paragraph: "44 22Nazi officials of the notorious Auschwitz extermination 23camp accused of responsibility for the killing of 300,000 24prisoners from a dozen European countries went on trial 25today before the Supreme National Tribunal." 26 Can you explain the figure of 300,000 in 1947,

. P-68

1with the Auschwitz officials being put on trial in Krakow 2in Poland by the Polish authorities? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
My Lord, this is a number which also has come up in a 4newsreel of the trial which was shown in German cinemas. 5The 300,000 quite literally is, as it is mentioned here, 6prisoners from a dozen European countries. It was a 7number which, until the late 1980s, was also in the 8Auschwitz museum. It only referred to the actual people 9who had been imprisoned in the camp. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: And registered? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And registered. It did not refer to the people who had 12not been registered. 13MR IRVING: Well,, Professor, would you not agree that the 14court is entitled to find that a rather extraordinary 15explanation? On the one hand, we are told that 4 million 16people had been killed in Auschwitz, and yet these people 17were being put on trial for the murder of 300,000. There 18is no mention of the other 4 million in round figures. 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The facts are the facts, Mr Irving. I have studied this 20issue of the 300,000 where this number came from. It was 21a number that refers to registered prisoners. I do not 22know why the Polish court decided at the certain moment to 23make that issue the issue on which they were going to 24prosecute the people who were accused in Auschwitz. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Without any reference to the larger figure which was being 26set aside. I can appreciate that, in the case of a

. P-69

1murderer who has been accused of murdering 20 people, a 2court may decide to prosecute just on one murder, but at 3least they would mention the fact that 19 other cases were 4taken into consideration. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but, my Lord, I have made a very careful study of the 6trial of the architects of Auschwitz. Maybe I can answer 7by just telling you in short that, during the trial of the 8architect Dejaco in Vienna in 1972, the prosecution 9ultimately tried to have him condemned for murder of one 10inmate on a building site. Now maybe you can explain to 11us or to someone else why this would be a proper way to 12proceed, but they ultimately did not want to take him, to 13actually challenge his statement that he had nothing do 14with the blue prints, that they had been made in Vienna. 15They just executed him, but an incredible amount of 16testimony was heard on this particular incident in which 17he would have drowned in a large bucket of water, this 18particular inmate who was not pulling his weight on the 19building site. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I interrupt you at this point and say that it is true 21that both Defendants were acquitted, were they not? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Ertl was not officially acquitted, but his status remained 23kind of unclear. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not an expert on Austrian law, but certainly under 25English they law they could have then reprosecuted him on 26any one of the other murders. They could have had him

. P-70

1back up before the beak but yet they did not. He was set 2free. Both Defendants were set free and never prosecuted 3again although they were the architects whose names appear 4on those blue prints which were in your hands in 5Auschwitz. Is this not a remarkable comment on the state 6of the evidence? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think it is a remarkable comment on the way the Austrian 8court operated. I have all the files in my possession. 9Certainly after I came out of months of studying the files 10in the courtroom there, I must say that I lost much of my 11respect at least for Austrian justice. They had all the 12documentation from Auschwitz. They had all the blue 13prints. They had all the documents which had been 14under discussion, for example, in my expert report with 15two or three exceptions only. They got material from 16Moscow for this trial. They had the blue prints there and 17they were never consulted. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
And yet they were acquitted. So it was a perverse result, 19in other words? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It was a very perverse result and I think that, if indeed 21an expert witness had been brought in to look at those 22documents carefully, they would not have been acquitted. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. You had these documents before you at the time 24you wrote your book "1270 to the present"? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Which documents? 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
The Ertl trial document. I had the Ertl trial documents.

. P-71

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Were you aware of the 1947 figure of 300,000? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I was aware of that figure. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
And that the German newsreel in January 1948 again said 4that in the judgment passed on these 40 men, many of whom 5were hanged, they were hanged for the murder of 300,000 6people in Auschwitz? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I did not know the newsreel. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: The 300,000 were not grassed, presumably, if 9they were registered prisoners? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Some of them would have been gassed. Others would have 11been beaten to death. Some of them would have been killed 12with phenyl injections. People would have been shot and 13people maybe would have died from beatings or other 14causes. 15MR IRVING: Did you make any reference to these lower figures 16at all in your book on Auschwitz? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I did not, because I think these figures were 18irrelevant. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Were irrelevant? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Were irrelevant. The book ultimately presents a cumulative 21figure of all the deaths in Auschwitz, both of people who 22have died as a result of murder immediately after their 23arrival and of people who have died after having been 24registered in the camp. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are familiar, no doubt, with the book written by 26Professor Arno Mayer, "Why did the heavens not darken", in

. P-72

1which this Professor of Princetown University, who was 2himself Jewish and who cannot be called a Holocaust denier 3presumably, said that most of the deaths at Auschwitz in 4his opinion were from what he called natural causes, and 5that a very small percentage had been criminally killed in 6the accepted sense. What is your response to that? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That I am very happy to discuss the exact statement of 8Professor Mayer if I have the text in front of me. I have 9referred to him in my expert report. If you are happy to 10deal with my excerpt in the expert report, I am happy to 11look for it, but I am not going to comment in general on 12what Professor Mayer said without having the text. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
So are you saying in other words that you think Mayer is 14wrong? He got it wrong? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. I think he is saying, I cannot comment 16on a document which is not in front of me. Unfortunately, 17it is not a document, it is a book. 18MR IRVING: Do you not agree that I accurately precis-ed what 19he said? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think you do that. I do not think this is 21accurate, what you said. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
That Arno Mayer said that, in his opinion, most of the 23deaths in Auschwitz were through natural causes rather 24than from criminal intent? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Again, I am not going to comment on this text. The 26question was, did you appropriately precis Mayer's

. P-73

1argument? I do not think so. It is a rather long 2argument. I know it has been taken out of context many 3times, and Mayer's text has been taken as "in admission" 4that indeed Auschwitz was not an extermination camp. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is difficult to see how you can take that remark out of 6context. It seemed to be a very pithy summing up by him, 7which has been very widely quoted and caused much 8indignation, I agree, in the Jewish community. He may of 9course be totally wrong. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Professor van Pelt's position is again, 11I think, a fair one. If you want him to comment on what 12Mayer concluded, then he must have the right to look at 13the document. 14MR IRVING: Very well, my Lord. I will not delay the court by 15looking for that document now, but certainly we will refer 16to it ---- 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am trying to find the reference to it in 18Professor van Pelt. 19MR RAMPTON: Page 590, my Lord. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is not where I would have expected. 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is at page 629, 620. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I assumed it was at the beginning. 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It a little earlier also. It is actually in 89 that Mayer 24published his book. And so here, 594 and 592, all Mayer, 25590. It starts at 590. 26MR IRVING: My Lord, I think possibly I shall leave this until

. P-74

1after the luncheon adjournment and come back with chapter 2and verse. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Whichever you wish. 4MR IRVING: Because we are rather drifting away from the actual 5camp site, which is the way I was hoping to take this 6cross-examination. If I may produce the photographs 7again, we had concentrated on crematorium number 2, where 8you said that 500,000 people (in round figures) had been 9killed by the Nazis in that one buildings, this you called 10the geographical centre of any map of atrocities, a very 11telling phrase. Would you tell the court what this little 12building is down there? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. It seems to be a pump building. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
No. Would you accept from me that this is a coal bunker? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
A coal bunker? 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Or coke bunker. 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I thought you meant another one. This particular thing 18there? 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is a coke bunker. I have not got equipment here for 22measuring the size of that bunker, but it appears to be 23about 10 feet square, in other words a very small space. 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It seems to be a larger to me from what I remember but, 25again, 10 feet, 13 feet square, whatever. It is not a 26very large bunker.

. P-75

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not very large bunker for holding the fuel supplies for 2fuelling a mass incineration programme, I believe 3Mr Rampton would have called it, for incinerating hundreds 4of thousands of bodies? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I remind you, Mr Irving, that also in the crematorium 6itself was a very large coke storage space right next to 7the incineration building. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, I am familiar with the position of that in the 9drawings of the building. Not very much larger than that 10little hut outside? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think it will be probably possible to establish the size 12of that when we consult a plan, and I am happy to consult 13the plans in my trial bundle. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Was there a coke bunker in each crematorium 15or just one? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Each crematorium has its own coke bunker, yes. 17MR IRVING: It is also right to say that these crematoria were 18adapted to burn trash as well, the regular camp trash that 19came in? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The trash furnace in crematorium 2 was never installed. 21There was a trash furnace in crematorium 3, largely used 22to burn identity papers of people, and there were no trash 23incinerators in 4 and 5. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. The last picture that I wish to show the court 25and the witness and ask a question on is this large 26picture. This is crematorium number 2. You can see the

. P-76

1scale of it from the people standing down there, the 2tourists who arrived up that path, and this is 3Leichenkeller number 1, morgue number 1, on which we have 4now zeroed in, in other words. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Mortuary number 1? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Morgue number 1. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you describe the condition of that building, that 9particular mortuary, which is the one that you pointed at 10and said 5 "00,000 people died here", or you also said 11"this is the instrument with which millions were 12killed". 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We just saw the state of that room in more detail when we 14looked at the film clip. When we see Fred Leuchter 15measuring, together with his assistant, the size of the 16ruins, and there is my voice-over saying that Fred 17Leuchter is no Sherlock Holmes, we are actually looking at 18the site of the morgue 1 of crematorium 2. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was this building destroyed by the Nazis or by the 20Russians, I think there is some dispute on this, at the 21end of World War II? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The evidence points to the fact that the Nazis destroyed 23this building in two phases, and specially morgue 1. 24First of all, that when the gassing ceased in late 1944 we 25have the testimony of sonderkommandos and others that the 26gas chambers were dismantled, which means that the actual

. P-77

1installation within the morgue number 1 and of crematorium 22 and number 3, which had been created to adapt this room 3into a gas chamber, was removed, and that later the shell 4of the room, so to speak, was destroyed by dynamiting. It 5was a very detailed account of one sonderkommando, how 6they actually made holes in the columns. Dynamite is put 7in it and ultimately, in the case of crematorium 2, all 8the columns collapsed, with the exception of one. In 9crematorium 3 they were more successful and virtually 10everything collapsed there. So what you have now in 11crematorium 2 is that we have the remains of a concrete 12roof, which is basically collapsed on the floor. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is pancaked downwards? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is pancaked downwards. One column is still there and 15in some way it has folded over, that one column. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
So there are reinforced steel bars inside the roof? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Reinforced steel bars in the roof yes, and there is a hole 18right next to the column, and that is the hole through 19which Fred Leuchter climbed into that space at a certain 20moment. It is a very tiny space under that roof. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
When do you say this happened? In 1945? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The demolition of the gassing equipment happened in late 231944, November 44, and the ultimate demolition, the final 24demolition, of the crematoria happened in January 45. 25MR IRVING: Just so that we can get this quite straight, the 26evidence for this is verbal evidence from a member of the

. P-78

1sonderkommando? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. There are no construction documents about the 3demolition. Also, the construction office had been closed 4for some time. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are there any written orders from the camp commandant or 6from Liebehenschel or from some other official saying, 7I order that this building must be destroyed for whatever 8reason? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There are no records but I have to point out that the 10archive of the commandant, which was virtually 11systematically destroyed, began in that same period of the 12evacuation and that only by accident the bauleitung papers 13survived because they were forgotten. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
I was about to come on to that, Professor. Is it not 15extraordinary that the Nazis in their ruthless efficiency 16would go round destroying buildings and removing 17incriminating equipment which might have helped us very 18much today in this courtroom otherwise, but at the same 19time they allowed the Red Army to capture the entire 20construction files without the slightest murmur? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There are reasons for that which have to do with first the 22fact that the construction office was closed at the end of 231944 but none of the architects any more dared to oversee 24the destruction of the archive. They have been drafted 25back into the SS to fight on the Eastern Front, which by 26then had more or less come to Auschwitz. Second of all,

. P-79

1that the architecture office was at some distance from the 2camp itself and that there were two archives in the camp, 3one archive which was kept in the kommandantur, where 4people were until the very end, people who could attend to 5the destruction of incriminating evidence, and then there 6was in the Bauleitungbaracke, which was at some distance 7and I can point it out on the air photo if you want, this 8second archive which had been bundled up and simply was 9forgotten. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
So the Nazis remembered to destroy the buildings and 11remembered to take out every nut and bolt which might have 12helped us today, but they allowed the Russians to capture 13all the incriminating paperwork, except that it is not 14very incriminating either? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think that simply they allowed. I do not think 16that by early 1945, as the Russian Army was pushing 17through and Silesia was on the point of collapse, that the 18German Army was still very efficient or the SS in 19Auschwitz. I mean they were on the run and they were in a 20panic. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
A bit of panic and these things just got left behind? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I have a feel there is a 24suggestion lurking there and I want to try and put my 25finger on it. Are you suggesting that what the Russians 26captured were not authentic documents, or what the

. P-80

1Russians had produced were not authentic documents? 2MR IRVING: No, my Lord, totally the opposite. I am sorry I am 3being so frightfully obtuse in my cross-examination. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, you are not. You are doing very well but 5I want to understand the suggestion. 6MR IRVING: I am indebted to my Lord. The reason I am asking 7this is for two reasons. I am laying a bit of a trap, if 8I may put it like that, which will be sprung either before 9or after lunch. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: I see. Then I will not enquire any further. 11MR IRVING: I wanted to bring to your Lordship's attention the 12detail that the incriminating equipment that had 13apparently been carefully dismantled, every nut and bolt, 14and yet they had allowed all these records to fall into 15Russian hands, which does seem odd. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know, but I was wondering what the 17underlying suggestion is. You develop it after lunch. 18MR IRVING: We have discovered in fact that the Nazis were in a 19blue funk and in a terrible panic and just anxious to get 20away. How far away? Was the Russian line stationary for 21sometime on the River Vistula? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The Russian offensive of either the second Ukrainian Front 23and the Russian Front started moving on 12th January. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
12th January 1945, yes, in the early hours? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Until then it had been stationary. That is also one of 26the reasons that the Auschwitz camp remained from, let us

. P-81

1say, November 1944 until that offensive began on 12th 2January in a kind of limbo state. Then, after that 3offensive started on 12th January, in fact the decision 4was taken, no document again but a decision was taken, to 5actually evacuate the camp population and to destroy the 6most incriminating parts of the crematorium. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
So how far away was the Russian front during that limbo 8period, in rough terms, 20 miles, 50 miles? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I think they were -- they were substantially east of 10Cracow still at the time. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
On the River Vistula that basically was not there ----- 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes -- no, no, but the River Vistual more to the east. At 13that time they would have been as south as Auschwitz. 14They would probably have been, I would say, 100/150 15kilometres away. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. So we have narrowed it down to this building 17which has collapsed. The roof, as we see it in the air 18photographs, is in a mess. Beneath that roof we would 19have found all the equipment, bits and pieces, that would 20have been incriminating, but the Russians -- somebody blew 21up the building and it pancaked downwards, this roof, and 22for some reason the archeologists have never gone in there 23to find out what is still there, have they? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. People, I mean, Fred Leuchter went down there. I 25mean, it is on this tape. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Hats off to Fred Leuchter, in other words ----

. P-82

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But, I mean, which archeologist, I mean, what kind of 2expedition are you looking at? I mean, I do not think 3that many archeologists would have been particularly 4interested, given all the choices available in doing 5archaeology, in actually going down into that very small 6space under the roof to do their investigations there. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not only in this particular building, of course, there are 8many archaeological sites around the Auschwitz camp, 9I would have thought, which would have helped to solve a 10lot of questions. For example, mass graves, burning pits, 11which could have been investigated with modern 12archeological means like proton magnetometers, something 13which would detect the pattern of burning, things like 14this. Has any investigation like that been conducted by 15the Polish or any other authorities? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
As far as I know not. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. But investigations like that have been conducted at 18one or two other sites, though, have they not? I think 19recently at Treblinka or Maidanek? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
At the moment very big investigations have been done in 21Belzec, and part of this is as a result of the 22transformation of Belzec, to create actually a monument in 23Belzec, and like many of these, you know, when, in fact, 24you are going to make a change to the site, you want to 25know, first of all, what the site is, and let us say in 26Rome, when you put up a new apartment building, you first

. P-83

1send in the archeologist to see what is below there. So 2Belzec is -- actually still very serious work is being 3done right now. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Am I right in saying the investigations being done at 5Belzec are roughly into discovering the size of any mass 6graves. 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They are finding large mass graves and I have not seen 8detailed results. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have they been able to quantify the size of the mass 10graves? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have only this by hearsay, what the size of mass graves 12are. I mean, that these are large mass graves, I cannot 13further comment on it. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: But would investigating to find if there are 15any mass graves at Auschwitz cast light on the problem we 16have here, which is whether there were gas chambers 17because, as I understand it, if you have gas chambers and 18you have crematoria, you are not going to need mass 19graves. Indeed, that was one of the reasons why they were 20built in the first place. 21MR IRVING: My Lord, if I may interrupt your Lordship, the 22victims of these mass liquidations, like the liquidation 23of the Hungarians in the spring of 1944, as I understand 24it, alleged to have been partly cremated in the equipment 25we see here and partly cremated in open burning pits or, 26alternatively, buried for a time and then dug up again and

. P-84

1cremated subsequently. These alleged sites, would it be 2correct to say, Professor van Pelt, cannot be identified 3on any aerial photographs or have not been identified on 4any aerial photographers, large pits or mass graves? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think that the right analysis has been done on 6air photographs. Certainly when you go to the site, when 7you go to what is called the field of ashes, you walk 8through it, you see it, you see the remains of large 9burning pits. So, I mean, and I can testify with some 10knowledge, I have been at that site and I have seen the 11remains of these enormous burning pits, and I have picked 12up remains at the site. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
What kind of remains? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Of burnt bodies. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Of bodies? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. I mean, I have picked up burned bones which, 17obviously, have in some way been reduced to ashes. This 18was in 1990. I went there with Mr Pressec. Mr Pressec 19showed me the site. We spent a lot of time at the site. 20I have been there many times since. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Of course, when you operate a crematorium, they do not 22reduce the cadavers to pure ash, do they? They do 23generate bone as well as ash? Not many people know this, 24but they generate large lumps of bone which have to be 25pulverized or milled down? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes.

. P-85

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was there a bone mill attached to these crematoria? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. The sonderkommando, they give in detail accounts of 3how they had to take out the parts of the body that were 4not reduced to ashes, and with either wooden or metal 5implements crushing them into pulp. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
These might very well be the remains that you found in the 7field of ashes? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The field of ashes is quite far away from the 9crematorium. I think it would have been very unlikely 10that people would have carried those things from the 11crematorium to the field of ashes. One of the problems is 12that there is a barbed wired fence in between the two 13places. There is also a very deep ditch between the 14places, and that would have been very unusual. Also, the 15pits themselves are visible. You see in the landscape 16actually that there is a cavity there. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
So what did they actually do with these remains, the bone 18fragments that came out of the crematoria that had been 19pulverized by the sonderkommandos? There must have been 20very substantial quantities, tonnes and tonnes of them? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
All the ashes -- again there was an exception to this 22general account I am going to give me now, but in general 23the ashes and the crushed bones were combined, and at 24regular intervals with a truck were brought to the Vistula 25River which is very close by. Actually, it is visible on 26the photos and it was dumped in the river.

. P-86

1 The exception is that at certain times the truck 2broke down, especially in the Hungarian action, that this 3was impossible to do; and then there have been occasions 4in which the ashes were actually dumped in one particular 5pond near crematorium (iv). 6 The other exception, and this is on the basis of 7eyewitness testimony -- again no documents -- is that in 8the winter sometimes the ashes were used to actually throw 9on the iced roads in the camp in order to make them more 10convenient for everyone. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is the evidence for that rather lurid story? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is the evidence, eyewitness testimony, for example, 13of Mr Bacon who testified in the Eichmann trial in 14Jerusalem. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
He is, presumably, Jewish, therefore? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not suggesting that it makes him in any way 18unreliable, of course, but I am suggesting that possibly 19he may have derived advantage from giving that kind of 20testimony in Jerusalem in the Eichmann trial. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I ask a related question which I should 22have gathered the answer to but I do not know? 23Sonderkommando, were they all in inmates who were, as it 24were, put to work? 25MR IRVING: I was going to come to that, my Lord. I was going 26to ask for identity of ----

. P-87

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Were you? Can I not ask the question now 2just so I know the answer? 3MR IRVING: Yes. 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The sonderkommando were prisoners, people selected either 5on arrival or maybe sometimes a little later from the 6general prisoner population, who were going to work in the 7crematoria. They were housed either in the crematoria, 8especially from '44 onwards, but originally also in the 9men's camp in a special kind of barrack which was isolated 10from the other barracks with their own courtyard, and 11these inmates, 1944, when four crematoria were in 12operation and a group of 800 inmates, so roughly 200 per 13crematorium, working in two shifts of 12 hours each, so it 14would be 100 people at any crematorium at any time, 15operated the crematoria and were, again on the basis of 16eyewitness testimony, at regular intervals these groups 17were renewed after sometime. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is a very complete answer. Would there be anyone who 19could be described as a sonderkommando who was, in fact, a 20Nazi camp official? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you. 23MR IRVING: These sonderkommandos were all people who had been 24previously very endangered, of course, they were potential 25victims, and the story is that, as you hinted at the end, 26they were recycled, they were fed into the furnaces with

. P-88

1their -- have I understood correctly what your innuendo 2was -- at the end of their period of usefulness they were 3disposed of? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I would just like to ask you, you used the word 5"previously", what you exactly ---- 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Were they previously endangered? In other words, were 7they people who might otherwise have been exterminated, 8but they were given the option, "Do this job and you, like 9Scheherizada, you will continue to survive for a while"? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. Actually, you know, I thank God every day I was never 11in Auschwitz, but, given the choice, if I was in the man's 12camp and given the opportunity to get the job of 13sonderkommando, I would have tried to get out of it with 14any, whatever possibility because it was a very dangerous 15job. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
It was a kind of trustee, what we would call a trustee in 17prison? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, it is not at all, Mr Irving. A sonderkommando was a 19-- I mean, people knew what was happening in the 20crematoria. At a certain moment -- I mean, a recent book 21has been published by a research of the Avwaschen(?). "We 22cried without tears" is the title, which is a quote from 23one of the sonderkommando. This man has systematically 24started to interview surviving sonderkommandos. In all 25these accounts you see that people were appointed 26sonderkommandos without asked if they wanted to do this,

. P-89

1and that many of them realized it was a sentence of death. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Because? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And tried to get out of it. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Because? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Because they knew that the reason they were appointed as 6sonderkommandos, or they were selected as sonderkommandos, 7was because the group which had been sonderkommandos 8before had been eliminated. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but why did they eliminate them? 10Because they were able to bear witness? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Because they were able to bear witness and, yes, you do 12not want -- and also, I do not know, I do not know what 13happens, you know, we talk about Stockholm syndromes, and 14so on. I do not know at a certain moment what happens 15exactly between the SS and the sonderkommandos in the 16crematoria but probably. 17MR IRVING: A kind of symbiosis? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
What kind of symbiosis did emerge within at a moment these 19communities which formed themselves in the crematoria. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
So we can be specific about what we are talking about 21here, call a spade a spade, would it be right to say that 22a large number of these sonderkommando members were Jewish 23themselves? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
By definition, they were Jewish. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
By definition, they were all Jewish? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes.

. P-90

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
I did not appreciate that. So, in other words, all these 2eyewitnesses who were sonderkommandos were Jewish, the 3ones who are telling these appalling accounts of what they 4saw? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. If they are Jews and they have survived to bear 6witness, then these are Jews who bear witness, yes. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
They have done these horrible things. They have taken 8part in this appalling crime committed by the Nazis. They 9have been a participant in it, and this must have been a 10traumatic experience for them? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Primo Laffi(?) has written a masterful essay on the 12traumas of the sonderkommandos in the book which he just 13published before he died. Yes, this was a very traumatic 14experience. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
And how can they live with their sense of guilt or shame, 16do you think? How would they try to resolve that in the 17years of their retirement, if they survived, as a large 18number, apparently, did? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would refer you to Primo Laffi's ---- 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. You appreciate the point I am trying to make, that 21there may be a tendency to romanticize, a tendency to pass 22the burden of guilt, a tendency to -- would you agree that 23that is so? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am not a psychologist and I am not a chemist, so I can 25only at a certain moment state that, as an historian, as 26an historian, I am amazed by the way surviving

. P-91

1sonderkommando in different ways have been able to live up 2to their historical responsibility to bear detailed 3witness to what happened. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can we just be quite plain what we agree their tasks were, 5and then we can find out where we diverge? Their task 6was, basically, to handle the cadavers, the corpses, 7inside the crematorium, to rob them of the gold teeth and 8other precious artifacts, to cut off the hair and to feed 9the bodies into the furnaces? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I would like to be more precise than that. The 11sonderkommandos had very, very particular, very 12circumscribed tasks. There were, for example, 13sonderkommandos who only were running, basically, the 14household of the place where they were living. They did 15the "Stubendienst", it was called. There were in every 16barrack or, in this case, in the attic of the crematoria 17(ii), (iii) and (iv) they were four stuben [German 18spoken] and so on. These people were the 19sonderkommando ---- 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Actually in the building? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
In the building. They lived in the building. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
With their own shower rooms and bathrooms and sleeping 23quarters? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, they had beds. They were quite comfortable because 25they could make use of stuff which was left behind in the 26undressing room. So there were people in the

. P-92

1sonderkommandos who, in that sense, I mean -- I do not 2want to imagine what it is to live above the crematorium 3-- who actually were not involved in the operation of 4either of the gas chambers or the crematorium. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
They must have witnessed appalling scenes day after day? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They witnessed it and they heard about it from the other 7sonderkommandos when they came home, so to speak, 8upstairs. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
And their less fortunate friends could say, "You are 10helping the Nazis with their Devil's deed"? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have no idea what they could or could not say. I am not 12going to speculate on what they said. Let me -- may 13I finish the tasks of sonderkommandos? 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. That is one category, the ones who were 15doing the housework? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, so, basically, the sonderkommandos who are in the 17Stubendienst. Then there are sonderkommandos who had to 18supervise the undressing of the victims. This was again a 19very particular task. 20MR IRVING: Of the living victims? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Of the people who came to the undressing room. These were 22the people who had to maintain some kind of order in the 23undressing room, who had to help people with the 24undressing and they also had to gather the clothing, take 25care, of course, that pairs of shoes remain together and 26things like that, because if you have a mountain of shoes

. P-93

1and they are all, you know, they are not tied together, it 2is going to be not very useful for the people back home in 3Germany. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is from their eyewitness evidence, right? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is from eyewitness evidence, yes. We do not have any 6German document outlining the specific responsibilities of 7sonderkommando. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
I have to keep on making that point quite plain. We are 9relying entirely on their word of what happened? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The word of sonderkommandos and also of German officials. 11So we have sonderkommandos who work in the undressing room 12and that is their task. Then there are sonderkommandos 13who work in the gas chamber which means actually bringing 14people, helping people, to go into the gas chamber and 15then ---- 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, actually ramming them in, basically? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Whatever, in the beginning, that does not, when the doors 18initially open, one does not have to do that -- and who 19removed the corpses from the gas chamber and who clean the 20gas chamber afterwards. That is a particular group of 21sonderkommando. 22Then there are sonderkommandos who operated the 23elevator which was the next -- in the case of crematorium 24(ii), we are now only talking about crematorium (ii) 25because in crematorium (iv) and (v) the sequence is 26different.

. P-94

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
While we are dealing with the elevator, did one man have 2to go into the elevator itself or was it operated from 3outside? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It was operated from the outside. We have the bills for 5the elevators. We know what the elevators were able to 6do. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
We will come back to the elevators? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. So they operated the elevators which bring the 9corpses up to the incineration room. Then there was group 10of sonderkommandos which are called the "dentists". 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Was the only access, while we are on the elevators, 12between the so-called gas chamber, which is this big 13building we see here, and the furnace room, this 14elevator? Would they otherwise have to go outside around 15the outside of the building carrying corpses? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There were stairs going up, but there was no internal 17connection between the basement level and the incineration 18room or the main floor of the crematorium. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Rather an inconvenient layout? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, it was inconvenient. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Totally lacked ---- 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But it seemed to have worked very well for the Germans. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
A totally lacking system? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The system worked well, and I think I have pointed out in 25my book (and Mr Pressec has done it in his book) that 26crematorium (ii) was originally not designed as an

. P-95

1extermination plant, and so the Germans worked with what 2they had. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but the Germans were constantly building new 4buildings, were they not, and you and I, we have probably 5never visited a slaughterhouse, I am glad to say -- am 6I right in suggesting you have not visited a 7slaughterhouse in your life? I certainly have not. 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I have only read about it. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you take it from me that a slaughterhouse is built 10all on one level, all on ground level, so that there are 11no ups and downs for obvious reasons? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I cannot comment on it. It would make a logical 13proposition, but I remember reading about the 14slaughterhouses in Chicago where actually things, the cows 15are moved through the air, but that is just a memory from 16a thing ---- 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Anyway, you say crematorium (ii) was not 18originally designed as a ---- 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, and crematorium (iv) and (v) were and there 20everything is at the same level. 21Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
--- killing chamber? 22MR IRVING: The point I am making, my Lord, is if one is 23building a factory of death for a systematic killing of 24people and you are constantly erecting new buildings, it 25would not have been built in this extremely awkward way. 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but this was conversion from another

. P-96

1use. That is what Professor van Pelt is saying. 2MR IRVING: I think your Lordship appreciates the point I am 3trying to make 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I do. 5THE WITNESS: May I add to this that the Germans were not 6constantly building other buildings. There was a general 7build stop in Germany from 1942 onwards. In fact, very 8little construction was being done in Birkenhau. The two 9crematoria (ii) and (iii), they are identical exactly for 10the reason that they could not get crematorium (iii) built 11any otherwise since the building (ii) had been approved 12for another site for ---- 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Who applied the building stop? Was this the four year 14plan or? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The general, as relative to what has happening in the war, 16the only buildings which could be constructed in Germany 17from 1942 onwards were really buildings for the 18Wehrmachts, I mean for the Army or the armed forces, and 19the SS did not count on that at that moment under that 20general umbrella. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
So the factory was destroyed; it was not rebuilt? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And then there were buildings which had been destroyed by 23bombing. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, so ---- 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That was the other thing, and the Behaltsheimer which 26means provisional housing for people, but, in general,

. P-97

1there was a building stop. One of the reasons there are 2so many documents in the Auschwitz archives was because 3every building was by its very nature an exception which 4had to be approved at many different levels. So the SS 5had great difficulty to get anything built in Birkenhau or 6Auschwitz during the war. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
And they could not say, "Hey, we are carrying out the 8Fuhrer's orders here. This is the annihilation of 9millions of Jews that the Fuhrer has personally ordered. 10We demand top priority. This is the main plank of the 11national and socialist programme", is what you are saying? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
What I would like to say is that probably bureaucracy 13works in the same way in Germany in 1943 as it works 14anywhere else. If there is a general building stop -- 15I would like to imagine the situation where an SS man 16comes with your story to an official of the building 17department and what this German official will say to this 18man. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, normally, when people mention the Fuhrer's name, 20there will be a clicking of heels and "Ja Woll" and they 21would get that priority? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Mr Irving, if you had read my book carefully, you would 23have read in the book that at a certain moment there was a 24number of low ranking civilians in the Upper Silesian 25planning office who threatened to close the camp in late 261942 because of building code violations. This is one of

. P-98

1the reasons that the sewage treatment plant was built. So 2I think that the relation between bureaucrats at whatever 3level and at a certain moment the SS is a little bit more 4complex than you suggested. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think you are stretching the court's credulity if you 6suggest that a planning official in Upper Silesia could 7overrule the Fuhrer of the Greater German Reich and 8Heinreich Himmler in their dedicated desire, which we are 9constantly being told by the Defence, Hitler had ordered 10the systematic liquidation of the Jews, top priority, main 11purpose of the Nazi party, kill all the Jews, and you are 12telling us they could not get building priority? 13MR RAMPTON: That is, my Lord, to misrepresent any question 14I have ever asked Mr Irving. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: I was going to ---- 16MR RAMPTON: I never said anything about priority at all. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. Professor van Pelt, did you investigate, 18have you regarded it as part of your brief, as it were, to 19investigate the extent to which Hitler knew and authorized 20what was going on, you say, at Auschwitz? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. This has not been part of my brief. 22MR IRVING: I appreciate what you are trying to say, my Lord, 23that I am wrong yet again. I am familiar with ---- 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I was not saying you were wrong; 25I was simply saying that this is something that Professor 26van Pelt says is outside his remit.

. P-99

1MR IRVING: I do apologise for the inference, my Lord, but, in 2fact, if you are an objective historian and you are 3looking at the files, as I have, for example, in a 4parallel programme, the German V weapons programme, the V1 5and the V2 rockets with which your Lordship is probably 6also brutally familiar during the war years. I wrote a 7history of that project. They ran into similar kinds of 8priority problems for scarce materials, and the Fuhrer's 9order that this programme would get a "DE" which was the 10highest stufe or priority, was marked on all the 11appropriate contracts. "This is the Fuhrer programme, the 12Fuhrer's programme for construction of locomotives", and 13so on. So you did not have to be a genius or specializing 14in Adolf Hitler personally to find traces of the priority 15attached to a programme very low down in the 16documentation. The magic words would be uttered on the 17contracts and that would cut through the all red tape. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: I was simply making the observation that you 19cannot really put to this witness the extent of Hitler's 20involvement in the Auschwitz programme, if there was one, 21because it is just not within his knowledge. 22MR IRVING: With your Lordship's permission, I will now do 23precisely that. (To the witness): Professor van Pelt, on 24any of the documents you saw in the Auschwitz construction 25office, did you see any reference at all to a special 26priority being attached to this by Adolf Hitler?

. P-100

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Or to anybody between Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
There was no reference to Adolf Hitler on any of the 5document you saw in Auschwitz, in other words? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am indebted to your Lordship for having prompted that 8line of enquiry. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is a much better way of dealing with the 10point, if I may say so. 11MR IRVING: My Lord, I am totally unversed in the art of 12cross-examination and I am learning as I go along. 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think you are doing, as I said before, very 14well. 15MR IRVING: Thank you very much. (To the witness): Coming 16back to the eyewitnesses, you have a number of 17eyewitnesses you referred to. You mentioned German 18eyewitnesses of the activities of sonderkommandos. Can 19you remember the names of any of these eyewitnesses? 20Would it be Perry Broad or someone like that? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
So these eyewitnesses are people on whom, as the Germans 23say, you would take poison on them, you would go into the 24jungle with them; these are witnesses who you implicitly 25trust? They have not lied to us? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
To be very honest, I would not want to go into the jungle

. P-101

1with either Mr Pery Broad or Mr Hirst. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Or Mr Hirst or Mr Bendel or any of those people; they are 3all rather ---- 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would not want to trust them with my life, no. But 5I must say that given ---- 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you like just to expand on that? What was wrong 7about these people then? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They were thoroughly unpleasant people and they were in 9charge of a very evil operation. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you say that someone like Perry Broad or Mr Bendel, 11I think his name was, another of the eyewitnesses ---- 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Mr Bendel is not an SS man. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but would you say they were lucky to survive very 14long after the war was over? If you were an insurance 15company, you would not have been inclined to offer life 16policy on them? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I did not say that at all. I think, as we know, many 18ex-Nazis made good careers in the various German states 19after the war. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
If they survived ---- 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
One of them actually became a State Secretary to 22Mr Ardenal, so... 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, if they survived the allied war crimes courts and did 24not end up in Hammelin in prison as a guest of Mr Albert 25Pierpoint? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If they survived the allied war crime trials, but ----

. P-102

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you know how many German war criminals the British 2hanged in Hammelin? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not know. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Of the order of 1,000 in the postwar years. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Thank you for that information. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
So people who were in middle ranking positions in the 7German Nazi criminal hierarchy had to be on the look out, 8is that correct? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I presume that one had to be careful, yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
And there were various ways of surviving. One was to put 11on a black eye patch and pretend you were not Heinrich 12Himmler until you were caught, and another way would be to 13offer to help the allies, would this be correct? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think you are now making a blanket statement and I would 15not want to endorse it. I think that there are the 16situation, like any historical situation, has been rapidly 17changing before and after the defeat of the Germans, that 18there were various ways people assessed that situation, 19various ways that people dealt with it, and that, of 20course, probably since the SS was not very popular after 21the war and at a certain moment it was declared a criminal 22organization, that if I had been an SS man, I would have 23been very careful. I understand most SS men were and 24tried to pass themselves off as something else, including 25Heinreich Himmler who pretended to be an ordinary soldier. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you tell the court what the position of this

. P-103

1eyewitness Mr Pery Broad -- that is P-E-R-Y Broad -- in 2the Auschwitz camp was? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Pery Broad was a kind of an administrative official in the 4camp Gestapo which is called the political department. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So that was, as you correctly say, the Gestapo at 6Auschwitz camp? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
So his life prospects were not particularly rosy when the 9war was over if he fell into Polish hands or into the 10hands of anybody who knew what he had done, if he fell 11into the wrong hands? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
He was a low ranking official. I mean, he was something 13of a junior sergeant, I understand. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think of lower ranking than that. 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Sorry? 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Probably even lower ranking than that, I believe? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know exactly the British -- I think he was 18Rottenfuhrer or something. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Rottenfuhrer? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Rottenfuhrer, yes. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
As in "rotten" and "Fuhrer"? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. It is a peculiar, one of these peculiar SS ranks. 23He was one of the very, very small cogs in the machine. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
But hews in a position to see everything? 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can I put to you what I understand to be the 26suggestion? If I am wrong in my understanding, Mr Irving

. P-104

1will tell me so, I am sure. I think what is being 2suggested is that these camp officials made false 3submissions about what they had been doing at Auschwitz in 4order to ingratiate themselves with the British or whoever 5had captured them. If that is the suggestion, what do you 6say about it or do you not feel you can comment? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I mean, I think again the situations under which 8various testimonies were given again are very particular 9situations. Mr Pery Broad had, I think, very little to 10fear from anyone since he had been in the political 11department which was outside Stammlager, it was not inside 12Stammlager. He had very little direct contact with any 13prisoners. He was pushing paper in the camp Gestapo. He 14would not have been a person which would have attracted 15the attention of any surviving inmates, unlike his boss, 16Maximillian Bragne(?), who ultimately ended up in court in 17Cracow and was ultimately hanged. So I think that 18Mr Broad had very little to fear when he was captured and 19that for whatever reason he gave his testimony immediately 20after his capture by the British was -- I mean, I cannot 21speculate about his reasons. 22MR IRVING: Was he ever on the British payroll, the British 23Army payroll? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that he was used -- while he was, after he was 25captured and he was in British captivity, I would not call 26it "payroll", but he was, as far as I know, had some kind

. P-105

1of function in the camp as a translator. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but he was on the British Army payroll? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But he was an inmate in that establishment. I do not 4think that one is on the inmate -- as an inmate of a camp 5on the payroll of the captors. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. One more question on this line, Aide Bimko, 7you have used the eyewitness of a lady called Aide Bimko, 8B-I-M-K-O? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Real name Rosenberg, I believe, is that correct? She gave 11evidence, she provided eyewitness testimony? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
At the Ludenberg trial. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
What other eyewitnesses have you relied on, Mr Heinrich 14Pauber? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I ask you, are you talking about my book or are you 16talking about the expert report? 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am sorry. I will assume you used them in both. Do you 18wish to distinguish between your report and the book? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think that I used Bimko in the book. I did use 20Bendel in the book for one particular thing. So, yes, but 21I have mentioned them in the expert report not, by the 22way, as a way to ascertain what happened. I think that 23should be very clear about the use of the eyewitnesses in 24my report. It is a section, a rather large section, of 25my report to reconstruct how knowledge became available 26about Auschwitz after the war. So the question is, when

. P-106

1did people actually start to testify, at what moment and 2where were they? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
And what might they have learned from other witnesses? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And what kind of cross-referencing would there have been, 5cross-pollination. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
What I call cross-pollination, yes. 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Pollination, as you called it yesterday. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: Or "convergence", I think that is the other 9term. 10MR IRVING: My Lord, I am steering clear of the word 11"convergence" because of its legal meaning. I think 12cross-pollination is nice because it implies that they 13picked up a tit-bit from a newspaper. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow. I think, Mr Irving, you tell me 15when you have reached a convenient breaking point. 16MR IRVING: One more question. (To the witness): Are you 17going to tell us about any more eyewitnesses on whom you 18rely, because you do say that in certain key points of 19this issue you are relying more on eyewitnesses than on 20documents because the documents do not help us. 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I find this very difficult to answer right now because I 22do not really know where you are going to go and what 23issues you are going to raise, and when at a certain 24moment those issues are raised, I will introduce 25eyewitnesses I see fit. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
All will become plain to you immediately after lunch,

. P-107

1Professor. 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Then the trap will be set or it is sprung? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, we will look forward to that at 42 o'clock. 5(Luncheon adjournment) 6Professor van Pelt, recalled. 7Cross-Examined by Mr Irving, continued. 8MR IRVING: My Lord, with regard to the remark I made earlier 9this morning, might I ask or suggest that we might 10possibly consider ending slightly earlier this afternoon, 11to give me time to prepare in more detail for tomorrow. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think, if you need that, that is a 13perfectly reasonable request. How much earlier were you 14wanting? 15MR IRVING: Half an hour or one hour earlier. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Shall we compromise? Shall we make it half 17an hour? 18MR IRVING: Yes. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: So quarter to four. When you reach a 20convenient moment around quarter to four or a little 21earlier, we will break off then. 22MR IRVING: Yes. Professor van Pelt, you are probably the 23world's leading authority on Auschwitz. There is no need 24to be humble or modest about this. Is this correct? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is difficult to say that. I think that the history of 26Auschwitz is a very big history, a very complex history.

. P-108

1There are many parts of the history of Auschwitz about 2which we know very little, the history of medical services 3in Auschwitz, the history of children in Auschwitz. There 4are many historians who have worked on different parts, 5but I would say that, on the more limited issue of the 6history of construction in Auschwitz, or the history 7construction around Auschwitz, because, as you probably 8realize, the book deals also with what happened outside of 9the camp in great detail. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would say that probably one of the two people, yes, who 12was most comfortable with all the material. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
You are certainly the best that money can buy and, as we 14shall see from, I think I am confident in saying, the 15other witnesses who are being called by the Defence, they 16are of an unusually high calibre, so anything that you do 17not know about Auschwitz is not worth knowing. Am 18I correct? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think that is true. I think that the mass of 20material which is available in Moscow I have consulted. 21I have glossed these archives on microfilm, all of them, 22like the certain moment when I started my work in 23Auschwitz in 1990, I worked through the whole archive to 24build an archive there, but I have not studied every issue 25in detail. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you get a feel for it though, do you not, by looking

. P-109

1at this? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think you get a feel for it, yes. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is possible to scan very large bodies of documents at 4high speed, at unusually high speed, and still get a feel 5for what is in them? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
One gets a feel, but there were questions which I did not 7ask when I went through these archives, both in Auschwitz 8and in the Moscow archives, historical questions I did not 9ask, at a time which of course made me pass over certain 10files which may be now I wish I had looked at in more 11detail, because of some of the issues you seem to raise or 12which I expect you to raise. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it true that most of these Auschwitz files have now 14been microfilmed and provided to the US Holocaust Memorial 15Museum in Washington DC? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The Auschwitz files from Moscow have all been unblocked 17microfilmed, and the museum is now working on a microfilm 18collection of the files in Auschwitz itself. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
So there are probably not many pages of those archives 20that have not recently been turned by one researcher or 21another? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know what other researchers are doing. I have 23read in some of, I think in material which comes from your 24web site, I think, Mr Montonia has done a lot of work in 25Moscow. I think that, a number of people in the Holocaust 26museum seem to have been intimidated by this book and

. P-110

1thinks there is no more work to do, but I tell them that 2there is enough work to do still. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is a very well written book, if I may say so. Certainly 4for the last eight years they have been researching that 5because, when I was in the archives working on the 6Goebbels diary, at the table behind me were two 7researchers from the Washington museum, working on 8precisely the Auschwitz archives. They have had eight 9years working specifically through those archives, turning 10all the pages, looking for things, so not much would have 11escaped their attention of any significance. 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that of course the question is again, what 13question are you asking of the material? I mean what are 14people, when they look at these materials, looking for? 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
If they had found a smoking gun, if they had found 16evidence of a system establishing the link between Himmler 17and Hitler, anything like that, they would have caught the 18next plane back to Washington and held a press 19conference. 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Actually, I disagree with you on this, because now you 21assume that the issue which is so important to you, or the 22issue which is so important to maybe Mr Montonia, is also 23central to other people. I admit that, when Mr Pressac 24started his work on Auschwitz, he was very much inspired, 25so to speak, by the research agenda set by Robert 26Faurisson. For example, my own research agenda has been

. P-111

1completely independent of the issues raised by Holocaust 2deniers, revisionists or whatever name we want to give to 3these people who look with a very particular perspective 4into the files to find, as you call it, a smoking gun. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you not agree that it is quite an important element of 6the Holocaust story whether this was a series of arbitrary 7actions committed by individual gangsters and Nazi 8criminals, or whether there was an overall scheme or 9system directed by Adolf Hitler himself? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that it is an important question in so far as you 11think this is an open question. I think that, if as an 12historian you have come to the conclusion, on the 13convergence of evidence and the work of many eminent 14historians, that it is not any more a great historical 15question, or a historical question at all, then I do not 16think that you are going to waste your energy researching 17that issue. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is "convergence of evidence" another way of saying 19"reading between the lines"? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. "Convergence of evidence" is exactly what it says. 21That is, at a certain moment, for example, I will give 22just the example of the morgue number 1 in crematorium 2, 23that is a convergence between what sonderkommandos say 24about it, what Germans say about it and what the blue 25prints tell us, and what the ruins tell us. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is the building where you say 500,000 people were

. P-112

1killed in round figures? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
In the mortuary number 1 of crematorium number 2 in 4Auschwitz, Birkenhau. Can I ask you, please, in your 5report to turn to page 352? My Lord it is 352 of the van 6Pelt report. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. 8MR IRVING: Just going briefly back to the question of 9priority, which is not entirely unrelated to this, 10Professor van Pelt, do you recognize this as what you 11might call the verboder document? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
January 29th 1943? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, I do. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
We have not read this document in court, my Lord. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: I know I have read this but I am afraid it 17has gone out of my mind what exactly it is. 18MR IRVING: It is a conference held on January 29 1943 between 19the central construction office at Auschwitz and the local 20AEG branch at Kattowitz, the nearest town. "AEG informs 21this is the record made and signed by the two participants 22in the conference that it has not received valid iron and 23metal certificates in response to its iron and metal 24request, which were partly already filed in November 251942". Has your Lordship found it? 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. There are an awful lot of pictures

. P-113

1around this section. 2MR IRVING: Page 352. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: It is more difficult than it would appear. 4I have it now. 5MR IRVING: Page 352. It is a conference held on January 29th 61943, concerning electricity supply and installation of 7the concentrationslager, the concentration camp and the 8prison camp, at Birkenhau. The conference was held 9between the Auschwitz construction office and the local 10AEG office, the electric company, and I start at five 11lines downs: 12 "AEG informs that it has not yet received valid 13iron and metal certificates in response to its iron and 14metal request which were partly already filed in November 151942. Therefore it was not possible for this firm to 16begin construction of the ordered parts of the 17installation. There is a great likelihood that, due to 18the continued delay in the allotment of these requests, 19delivery will take much longer. As a result of this it is 20not possible to complete the installation and electricity 21supply of crematorium 2 (that is the building we are 22talking about) in Birkenhau by January 31st 1943. " I jump 23the next sentence: "This operation can only involve a 24limited use of the available machines whereby it is made 25possible burning with simultaneous special treatment". 26 Overlooking this, the overview of this document

. P-114

1is that the defence relies on this document, I think I am 2right in saying, as another pointer to the existence of 3something called "special treatment" in crematorium 2, 4sonderbehandlung. I am relying on the document for a 5totally different reason, saying that even Auschwitz, 6Birkenhau, had difficulty getting priorities. The purpose 7of this document -- am I right, Professor van Pelt -- is 8saying that they have difficulty running the electric 9equipment with the existing power supply? They cannot do 10this and that simultaneously because they do not have 11adequate power supply. It will blow the fuses or 12whatever? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this not an extraordinary document, Professor van 15Pelt? Does that not indicate that they had difficulty 16obtaining priorities even for an extra 100 or 200 yards of 17copper cable or whatever it took? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think it is not an extraordinary document at all, 19because the history of Auschwitz, or one of the histories 20of Auschwitz, is the history of the building department 21being unable to get anything done. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Because of lack of priorities? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I think we have to go back to one of the fundamental 24problems that the SS faced in the German wartime economy. 25That is that the SS at this moment does not have yet 26Wehrhoheit. This means that it is not yet recognized as a

. P-115

1part of the armed forces. The armed forces can get 2supplies relatively easily in the wartime economy because 3they are given this priority status and the SS is not. 4 On top of that, the crematorium we are talking 5about, the building which we are talking about, is a 6building which was commissioned, the original design had 7been created and all the paperwork had been done in early 81942, for this building, that is before there were plans 9to bring the Final Solution to Auschwitz. 10 So one of the reasons that happened exactly at 11crematorium number 2 and not any of the other crematoria 12is because crematorium 2 is quite literally, both in its 13design and in its whole administrative history, a holdover 14of an earlier history of the camp, that is an history 15which is not connected to Final Solution because the Final 16Solution only comes in Auschwitz in 1919, the paperwork is 17not the right paperwork. So you do not find a document 18like that for crematorium 3 or crematorium 4 or 19crematorium 5. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
It says here: "Because of this, it is absolutely 21impossible to supply crematorium 3 with electricity". 22They are referring again to the shortage of metal to build 23the extra copper cable to keep these things going. 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but crematorium 3 is an appendix to crematorium 25number 2. I was maybe a little too hasty on that thing. 26The problem is that, throughout the form, we are faced

. P-116

1with a situation in Auschwitz in which, in some way, this 2building in August 1942, there is a switch in the kind of 3design office after the Himmler visit of July 1942 which 4suddenly they will have to start to accommodate the Final 5Solution one way or another. There was a meeting on 19th 6August where these problems are discussed. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
1942? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
1942, and crematoria 4 and 5 are then in some way brought 9up as a solution to that particular problem. Then, for a 10number of months, crematoria 2 and 3 remain in limbo in 11some way. It is not exactly clear, for a number of 12months, if these buildings will be fully committed to the 13Final Solution or not. Then what you see is that it is 14only by December that the final papers are drawn up for 15the transformation of the basement. 16 Again, I think that we are dealing in this 17document with requests which have been made in November. 18It is the end document of a long history of problems. 19There continued to be problems in 1943 and 1944 with 20getting anything to Auschwitz. I am not surprised by it. 21This is basically the nature of getting things done in 22Auschwitz at the time. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
But all this implies, certainly to any objective observer, 24does it not, that here you have a document dealing with 25sonderbehandlung, which either means liquidating people or 26it does not. If it does mean liquidating, then it is part

. P-117

1of the Final Solution which this court is told was ordered 2by Adolf Hitler, or by the system, or by Himmler at the 3very least, yet they cannot get the priority for 200 yards 4of copper cable. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It seems also that what we hear from the historical record 6is that trains with Jews were parked on sites for days and 7days while other trains went by because the trains did not 8get priority to send the Jews to the extermination camps. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would I be right in inferring from that remark and from 10this document that whatever sonderbehandlung was, or 11whatever these trains were going towards, was not being 12done in the highest priority ordered by Adolf Hitler or by 13the system? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think you can draw that conclusion. I think the 15only conclusion you probably can do is that 16administratively, and I am only talking administratively 17and maybe even technically, the Final Solution was 18piggybacked on some other larger infrastructure, technical 19infrastructure, something like that, which was already in 20place, and which of course makes sense because the Final 21Solution, by its very nature, is a short-term process. 22I mean already by the end of 1943 the Germans had been 23able to kill more or less all the Jews they had been able 24to lay their hands on. Only Hungarian Jewry were still 25there intact because they had been able to go to Hungary 26yet. So in that sense there is no need to make this ----

. P-118

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor, that is rather an exaggerated statement to say 2the Germans had been able to kill all the Jews they had 3been able to lay their hands on. Do you wish to 4reconsider that statement? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not. I think that this is a very fair 6description of the historical situation. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
There were very large numbers of Jews in Germany still 8alive at that time and performing useful tasks in the 9munitions factories. 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If you provide the evidence for all this very large number 11of Jews, I am happy to consider it, but at the moment ---- 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very large numbers of German Jews actually survived in 13Germany for one reason or another. 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If you give me the evidence, if you mention ---- 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not so that in some cities like Berlin or Stuttgart 16the round up was pursued with great energy and verve and 17in other cities it was not pursued with much energy or 18verve at all? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
My Lord, I am not a specialist on round-ups in Berlin and 20I prefer not to ---- 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: May I ask you a question and it is this. Do 22you accept that when, or shortly after, Himmler visited 23Auschwitz in July 1942, a decision was taken to accelerate 24the extermination programme, what you call bringing the 25Final Solution to Auschwitz? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not agree with the way you formulate it right

. P-119

1now. 2Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
You do not? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I think a distinction we made in the book, and which 4maybe I should make right now, is that there was a 5practice of killing Jews in Auschwitz before 4th July 61942, that from 4th July to 19th July, 18th July 1942, a 7kind of inbetween situation emerged, it is only a 14 day 8period, and that after 18th July, the Himmler visit, 9Auschwitz was really directed to become a place where a 10policy of extermination exists, so we move from practice 11to policy, and where the practice of killing Jews in 12Auschwitz before 4th July 1942, and maybe in a more larger 13sense before 19th or 18th July 1942, is the result of a 14number of contingent situations that the SS in general and 15particularly the SS in Auschwitz sees itself confronted 16with when certain groups of Jews arrived. 17Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
So it becomes policy but it does not become urgent 18policy? Is that what you are saying? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is certainly very urgent for the people on the ground 20in Auschwitz. They tried to get things done. 21Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
I meant for those directing the policy. 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I wonder what your Lordship means by "urgent for the 23people who are directing the policy"? 24Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Well, they regarded it as a priority -- this is my 25question -- that the extermination programme should 26proceed faster and on a broader basis than it had

. P-120

1hitherto? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would say that the extermination programme, yes, should 3become all inclusive at the moment. There are great 4discussions about when the decision for the Final Solution 5was taken. Professor Browning will be able to talk on 6that. But certainly what we see is that, in the summer of 7-- and we are only talking about Auschwitz right now. 8I would like to be very careful because I do not want that 9the discussion about what happens in Auschwitz in some way 10is going to be the discussion about the Final Solution as 11a whole. We are talking here about one camp. Other 12things are happening elsewhere. The Operation Reinhardt 13camps are being built, Treblinka common operation days 14later, Belzac has already been in operation before. 15 So in the case of Auschwitz, and that is 16something which Deborah Dwork and I tried to demonstrate 17in our book, Auschwitz was not meant to be an 18extermination camp. It is in some way almost hijacked by 19that programme when other things which are happening in 20Auschwitz are not going to be realisable during the war. 21So certainly, yes, Auschwitz now, which is a place where 22these other projects are collapsing, these projects which 23Himmler had envisioned of settlement and so on, Auschwitz 24is now made available and it is going to be made available 25administratively, in the sense that within the next months 26you see that decisions are taken, of which there are

. P-121

1significant traces in the records of the architectural 2office. 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Thank you very much. 4MR IRVING: Can I ask you what kind of significant traces we 5are talking about there? I was hoping to obtain from you 6during that statement some kind of indication of what 7documentary basis you were making those remarks on, 8because of course you have now stepped beyond the barbed 9wire of Auschwitz, so to speak, and are talking about 10grand policy and grand decisions. Is this what you have 11acquired from reading other people's books, or from what 12you have read from the archives in Auschwitz or Moscow? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Let us forget, if you like, other people's books. It is 14going to be a kind of longish discussion. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
I hope we can keep it short. 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
You made certain remarks in response to his Lordship's 18question about July 1942, and you said that, no, you did 19not think that a decision; was taken at that time, or 20words that effect, and I just wanted to know what your 21basis for saying that was? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I said a decision was taken. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
What was your basis for that statement? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There are a number of things. We know from Commandant 25Hirst's account that Himmler came, and we know he visited 26the site. Hirst says that he watched a gassing.

. P-122

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
There is an inference then from cause and effect? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. Himmler does not like to go to Auschwitz at that 3time. I mean, it seems to be that Himmler is not going to 4go out of his way from the Wolffschanze, wherever the 5headquarters are in Russia, to Auschwitz on the way to 6Globocnik in Lublin. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
He wrote to his mistress on the day before and said: 8"I have a very unpleasant journey to undertake. I am 9going to visit Auschwitz and there are certain things one 10has to do for Germany", a rather odd sentence. 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Whatever he writes to his mistress, I agree this probably 12was a trip he did not look forward to. Then, among the 13various meetings he has, he has a meeting with Kummler, 14which also he is going to. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can you explain to the court who Kummler is, please? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Kummler is the head of SS Construction, who is there and 17also they have a long meeting in the construction office, 18in the Auschwitz construction office with Bischoff, where 19they are discussing obviously construction matters. Now 20we see that within a month the first design for what will 21become crematorium 4 materialises, which is a document 22signed 14th August, which only shows the incineration part 23and part of whatever is connected to the incineration 24part. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I interrupt there and ask you to inform the court what 26happened to Bischoff after the war? Was he put on trial?

. P-123

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, he was not put on trial. He died in Bremen in 1950. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
He died in his bed in 1950? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know where he died, but he was never prosecuted. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Finish your answer, Professor van Pelt. You 5said they meet together and, as a result of that meeting, 6crematorium 4 was built? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
As a result of that meeting we first see a first drawing, 8blue print copy, whatever it is, for an incineration 9installation which had not been on the table before that. 10That is the very first thing. It is one for an 11incineration installation with eight ovens or two muffle 12ovens, a complete new concept. 13MR IRVING: Which one was that? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This was crematoria 4 and 5. Then there is a letter. 15I think it is in the bundle but I do not know where it is 16in the bundle. I would like to maybe take the letter 17out. It is about a meeting which is five days later after 18this drawing appears, which actually discusses these 19buildings. It is famous and notorious letter which talks 20about the Bader anstalten versonderbehandlung. 21MR RAMPTON: Your Lordship will find that, as amongst other 22places, as the document in K 2 at tab 4, page 2. It is 23also reprinted in the report, but I cannot find where it 24is in the report at the moment. 25MR IRVING: This is August 1942? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is 19th August 1942.

. P-124

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Will you tell the court, while they are looking for the 2documents, what was happening at this time in Auschwitz? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Our transports were arriving. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would it not be right to say that Auschwitz was in the 5grips of the most appalling epidemic, one of the biggest 6epidemics in a concentration camp in history? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, an epidemic was happening, but I am happy to come 8back to the epidemic or any other matter because actually 9we have to ---- 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
I think possibly it would be more frank with the court if 11you had mentioned this as you went along rather than try 12to draw inferences which the court might otherwise be 13misled into taking. 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Give him a moment. He is at the moment 15describing the meeting that took place with Kummler and 16Bischoff and Himmler. 17MR IRVING: My Lord, I am very forgetful and, by the time he 18gets to the end of his remarks, I might forget to make 19this point. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: I understand that. Go on. How does this 21document fit in with that? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This document is a remarkable document because, first of 23all, it introduces in the history of the camp suddenly two 24buildings of which there is no other kind of earlier 25records. It is in clause number 2 that it talks about the 26creation of two, three-muffle ovens, near or next to the

. P-125

1"Badeanstalten fur Sonderaktionen", the bath 2installations for special actions. I would like to point 3out once more that it is between quotation marks, this 4sentence. They have been talking about these two triple 5muffle ovens, which is the kind of standard in the camp at 6that moment. These are the ovens which were originally 7designed for crematorium number 2. This is what they have 8been working with. They have been designing this. 9Prufer, the engineer of Topf, proposes instead to install 10in Auschwitz already completed bereits fertigestellten, 11ovens, or bereits fertigestellten Lieferung, which means 12it is a shipment which is already completed, which was 13going to another site, an SS site, at Mogilev, and that 14these ovens will be installed next to the badeanstalten 15fur sonderaktionen. We know that the ovens for Mogilev 16were designed in late 1941, taken into construction there 17and these were these eight muffle ovens. 18 So one of the things, combined with that drawing 19and combined with the four-week period which separates 20this document from the meeting Himmler has in the 21architectural office in Auschwitz, we know that suddenly 22this is quite a big change of course in Auschwitz. They 23are going to build, these two crematoria come up, these 24two incineration installations, which are not yet named. 25If we go to clause number 7 on the next page, we actually 26see that Prufer comes back to it on the next day. That is

. P-126

1a meeting. It actually talks about a meeting of 20th 2August 1942. 3 So Prufer stayed the night over in Auschwitz and 4Prufer asked then for an official confirmation, an 5official order, to basically get either the three muffle 6ovens, or he wants to know if he should get the eight 7muffle ovens, and in a little handwritten note to the side 8it actually says on the 24th August 1942, something like: 9Prufer seems to have whatever -- I cannot really read 10that -- (German spoken - handwriting on document 11illegible) -- which means that on 24th of August 1942 12Prufer tells actually that the eight muffle ovens which he 13had suggested on the 19th to be taken from the Mogilev 14shipment actually is going to Auschwitz. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: They are being diverted? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They are being diverted. 17MR IRVING: Can I ask a question here, my Lord, and interrupt 18at this point? 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but the answer was an answer to a 20question which was properly asked. 21MR IRVING: I appreciate that, my Lord, but it was beginning to 22run away with my cross-examination. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: It does happen sometimes. 24MR IRVING: It is quite useful, but this document shows 25preparations being made in long term for the disposal of 26large numbers of cadavers. That is all it shows.

. P-127

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But there is an issue. I had asked for a easel. I wonder 2if I would be able to draw a graph which would make 3things, I think, more ---- 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: I can see it. Yes, you do not have any 5objection, do you, Mr Irving? 6MR IRVING: Can I just invite, while these are being set up, 7the witness to have a look at the letter which I wrote to 8him on May 29th 1997. My Lord, it is in the little bundle 9you have with about 10 pages in it headed: "Documents on 10Auschwitz". 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 12MR IRVING: It is within that. The second item is the letter 13I wrote to him. I am afraid it is not numbered, but about 14page 6 there is a page ---- 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got this, Professor van Pelt? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The letter -- it is in one of my documents here. I do not 17which number. 18MR IRVING: It is the page headed: "Documentation is 19available", the first words on that page 20are "Documentation is available". It is about page 6, my 21Lord, of the letter. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think I must be looking at the wrong thing. 23MR IRVING: It is the little bundle headed on the top 24left: "Quick navigation". 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have that, but I have not the page 26beginning ----

. P-128

1MR IRVING: Page approximately 6 in that letter. It is the 2page beginning with the words "Documentation is 3available". 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, page 3 I have it as. 5MR IRVING: Yes. My Lord, the final paragraph of that is a 6paragraph from the second unpublished volume of my 7Churchill biography which gives an intercept, the text of 8an intercept, of an Auschwitz message in that very month, 9August 1942. I think it is of relevance, my Lord. 10"Further information did reach Churchill from his most 11secret sources lifting the veil on what was actually 12happening. ... (reading to the words) ... commandant 13transmitted in code to Berlin yielded figures for death 14rates in several concentration camps during the previous 15month. These included 21 deaths at ... (reading to the 16words) ... and in what was evidently a fast growing camp 17at Auschwitz and Upper Silesia there had been the notable 18totals of 6,829 male and 1,525 female fatalities during 19August 1942". This is precisely the month of this 20conference, my Lord. Not without significance, I think. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, well, it is a question, is it not, 22really? 23MR IRVING: Yes. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: What has happening at Auschwitz. The 25question is this. 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I trust the mortality figure has been also arrived at by

. P-129

1other means. I mean, this is in the death books also you 2find the mortality of 9,000 people in Auschwitz in that 3month of August. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: But the question is, let us just put the 5question, that what was going on at Auschwitz in 6August/September had nothing whatever to do with Himmler's 7visit in July. It was because there was a raging typhus 8epidemic. That is the question, is it not? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If that is the question, I disagree with it, and I would 10like to review that question by actually looking at the 11relationship between incineration rates in the camp as 12plant in 1942 about peak mortality on the typhus about -- 13and at a certain amount we can even talk about more 14capacity but we probably need to do that; but I have 15prepared some diagrams which I would just like to have as 16a reminder so I can draw it up on the board. 17MR RAMPTON: Can I ask where they are? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
On the board. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think they are going to be drawn now, as I 20understand it? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am happy to draw them now. 22MR RAMPTON: He has done some prep, I think, and he would like 23to do the drawings, big drawings, by reference to the 24prep. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: I follow. 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They are there.

. P-130

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, you may not be keen on this, but 2it is something Professor van Pelt is entitled to do. 3MR IRVING: My Lord, I am in your hands. This is your 4Lordship's court and I am capable, I am sure, of ---- 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am afraid I am deciding that it is a proper 6thing for him to do if he wants to illustrate his 7evidence. 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
OK. The first basis for this is to establish red in this 9drawing, red will be population. Now, in 1942, we are now 10talking about early summer of 1942, there is an 11actual population in Auschwitz, and I am going to do this 12by 50,000 increments, actual population in Auschwitz ---- 13MR IRVING: Are you referring to Auschwitz or Auschwitz and 14Birkenhau? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Auschwitz and Birkenhau. I am talking about the whole 16camp. The whole camp for which, basically, incinerators 17are being drawn. At that moment there is an actual 18population of 25,000 people in the camp, over 25,000 19people. But at that moment also there is a projected 20inmate population, they are working towards, they have 21designed and under construction, the camp to hold in total 22150,000, which is 120,000 in Birkenhau and 30,000 in 23Stammlager. So they are designing with that in mind. 24That is what they are investing for. This is the actual 25population. 26 Now, at that moment there is a typhus epidemic

. P-131

1going on and the typhus epidemic reaches in August of 19, 2in August of 1942, a mortality in one month of little over 3a third of the camp population. Now, people are being 4shipped in which makes it kind of difficult at that time 5to know exactly. It is an enormous mortality. In three 6months the typhus epidemic would have continued in the 7camp and nobody would have been brought in. Everyone 8would have died. 9MR IRVING: Is it right that the camp was under quarantine at 10this time? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The camp was under quarantine, but people were still being 12brought in. So if we look by implication at, let us say, 13the next year, if the camp were to have an inmate 14population of 150,000, and if hygienic conditions would 15not have improved, if the German medical department in 16Auschwitz would have been as incompetent and so little 17resources, the same small resources would be brought in, 18it would make sense to start planning for a mortality of 1950,000 people of the summer of 1943. It is a very rough 20calculation, but in some way this would have been -- you 21would have start to look at that possibility. 22 Now, at that moment in Auschwitz one has 23actually an incineration capacity, and I am only talking 24about crematoria ---- 25MR IRVING: My Lord, I am unhappy about this kind of evidence 26because I do not think Professor van Pelt is an

. P-132

1epidemiologist and we had ---- 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: I do not think we are getting into the realms 3of epidemiology on what he is doing so far. 4MR IRVING: Well, we do not know at what rate epidemics grow, 5whether they grow exponentially or by mathematical 6progression or how. It is not a simple, straightforward 7linear progression, my Lord, and I am sure an 8epidemiologist could inform us on that. 9 Although I have no objection to Professor van 10Pelt continuing this line of evidence, I would wish to 11make it plain that ---- 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: No, but he is making the very simple point, 13if I may say so ---- 14MR IRVING: It is very, very dangerous ---- 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- that it was not an unreasonable 16assumption for the planners to make that they were going 17to continue to have one-third mortality from typhus. Is 18that really what it comes to? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is the point I make. What would be the situation if 20they said, "We face this disaster right now. We do not 21think we can deal with it next year. We have to plan for 22a similar disaster next year" 23MR IRVING: I shall ask questions about this when the time 24comes. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course you can, but just let him develop 26the point.

. P-133

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
So we are now going to get what is the actual cremation in 2an incinerator in crematorium (i)? It is the only 3crematorium operation at that time. It is 10,000 corpses, 4according to German sources, 10,000 corpses per month, 340 5per day, which means that the incineration capacity in 6crematorium (i), and we are not even talking about 7arriving Jews, but simply for the mortality in the camp 8itself during the typhus epidemic, more people are dying 9from typhus, incidentally, then the crematorium working 10full-time can deal with. 11 There is also at that moment a crematorium which 12is under design, which is crematorium No. (ii). Now, 13crematorium (ii) was going to replace crematorium No. 14(i). We have plans for that. It was going to be built on 15top of crematorium No. (i). It is a plan of early January 161942. This means that crematorium (ii) would not be 17backed up by crematorium (i). So if in the next year 18crematorium (ii) would be available, crematorium (ii) has 19an incineration rate of 1440 corpses per day, which the 20Moscow document says which was yesterday challenged ---- 21MR IRVING: This is the document that was challenged? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, which means that when crematorium (ii) would have 23been built, the next year available that still the 24cremation, the incineration capacity of crematorium (ii), 25once crematorium (ii) would be built, would have been less 26than the worst case scenario if a typhus epidemic in 1943

. P-134

1would have broken out. 2 So it means that the SS, in terms of the typhus 3epidemic of 1942, was not adequately prepared to deal with 4some of the typhus epidemic of the same scale a year 5later. This is the situation before Himmler's visit. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not true that cremation is not the only way of 7disposing of bodies? They can be interred. They can be 8sent to other places to be cremated? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There is, but I think that you would like to point that, 10in fact, the incineration capacity is not going to be 11sufficient and, of course, people can be interred. 12 Let us look now at the next year, where we are 13in 1943, and then I will go and look at what happened in 14between. In 1943, the early summer, we are sitting with 15exactly the same maximum planned inmate population of 16150,000. It has changed somewhat in the make-up because 17Birkenhau will have less people, because what is called 18building BA3, building section No. 3, will not become any 19more a full camp, it will get a kind of Lazarett 20installation, but instead of that people will be 21accommodated in various satellite camps close, so still we 22deal with ---- 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did you say it was going to have a hospital built in 24there? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Oh, yes. As I said in my book, and I think you 26complimented me on this section.

. P-135

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
I thought they exterminated all the sick prisoners? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We can deal with that later, if you want to put that to 3me, Mr Irving. By that time, the inmate population in 4Auschwitz itself has risen to 75,000. 5 Now, if we now look at what if a typhus epidemic 6of the same scale would have occurred (and this is a big 7"if") one would have been wise to have available 8one-third of that, which is 25,000, and, theoretically, to 9have available -- sorry, 50,000. So this is 25,000 10available if such a typhus epidemic occurs again, and if 11the camp is going to be completely free, one would expect 12at least to have an incineration capacity of 50,000 13people. 14 Instead, the available incineration capacity in 15the camp at that moment -- and this is available, this is 16not any more planned -- is 120,000 corpses per month. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is that based on? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This is based on the calculation that the Taiber itself 19gives of the incineration capacity of the four crematoria 20-- may I finish? 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Based on the document that we are challenging? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is based on the documents you are challenging, but 23the document which seems to be supported also by 24eyewitness testimony. 25 The only point I want to make right now at this 26moment is that the incineration capacity in the camp on

. P-136

1the monthly basis in Auschwitz in 1943 far and far exceeds 2the absolutely worst case scenario of typhus developing, 3typhus developing in this camp; and I have to stress here 4the worst case scenario because, in fact, the SS doctors 5have worked very hard to limit the possibility for typhus 6to occur. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Right. Thank you very much then. That was 8all an answer, Mr Irving, to your question -- actually 9I put it for you -- whether the increase in capacity might 10have been nothing to do with Himmler's visit, but solely a 11response to the typhus epidemic. It was a long answer but 12that is what it was answering. 13MR IRVING: We share the guilt for inviting that answer, my 14Lord. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, if "guilt" is the right word. 16MR IRVING: I would only draw attention to two or three aspects 17of it. 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course. Ask questions. 19MR IRVING: Firstly, if we are to believe these figures, then 20the SS, or whoever, were planning to wipe out over 21three-quarters of the entire camp population and 22incinerate them which seems a rather pointless exercise as 23this is a slave labour camp? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Sorry, is this a question? 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The issue, of course, is that they are not intending to

. P-137

1wipe out the camp population; they are intending to wipe 2out people who do not belong to the camp population, 3because people are arriving in Auschwitz and who are not 4going to be registered in the camp. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
So the left-hand column in that case, is it not, is 6irrelevant to the calculations because that left-hand 7column refers to a totally different body of people, to 8people who are living there and not the arrivals, shall we 9say? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, but the left-hand graph refers to the situation before 11the visit of Himmler on 19th July. The right-hand graph 12represents a situation after Himmler's visit, and the big 13change in incineration capacity is, in fact, the decision 14taken at that meeting which is confirmed by the document 15to actually not only have crematorium (ii) but also 16crematorium (iii) and crematorium (iv) and crematorium 17(v). 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
But the figures that you are relying on here with these 19two histograms, if I am right in saying, they rely 20entirely on that document which, you may remember, I was 21challenging the integrity of yesterday? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I mean, if you want me to rely on, for example, Hirst's 23testimony, I would say that the green bar would even 24higher, or if I have to rely on Mr Taiber, we actually get 25very close to that. It is not only the document; it is a 26convergence of the document with eyewitness testimony,

. P-138

1both of sonderkommandos and of German officials. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor van Pelt, we will be hearing a little bit more 3about the quality of the testimony given by Taiber and 4Hirst later on. But the fact remains that in all the 5construction department records that you have read, 6including that August 1942 memorandum you are relying on, 7there are no figures that anywhere come near these. It is 8speculation by yourself and back of envelope calculations, 9projections of what might have been and a kind of rough 10and ready kind of scaling up and extrapolation for which 11we have no basis in epidemiology (because neither of us is 12an expert in that field); we do not know the way that 13epidemics grow or whether they grow exponentially or in 14any other manner, is that not so? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Mr Irving ---- 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
There is no basis in the archival record that you have 17seen for the figures you gave, apart from that one 18document that we challenge? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Mr Irving, the point is, I think, very simple. You claim 20that the epidemic in August 1942 -- you raised the issue 21of the epidemic in 1942, then you say that we can -- you 22suggest that we can, and others have said, that you can 23explain the enormous incineration capacity in Auschwitz by 24looking at the typhus as being the reason to plan this 25crematoria. 26 Now, we are talking here about a typhus

. P-139

1epidemic, an enormous typhus epidemic, I agree, it was a 2disaster. In August 1942, the camp was in a very bad 3shape. But if you start to plan on the basis of that 4worst possible scenario, or would you want to suggest then 5a typhus epidemic which wipes out in one month almost a 6whole camp population of 120,000 out of 150,000 projected; 7so if you want to use the typhus argument (and you 8introduced it and I did not) I can refute that by looking 9at the incineration capacities. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, the facts are staring you in the face. This 11conference is taken in the middle of a camp which is in 12quarantine, subjected to, as you yourself admit, the most 13appalling typhus epidemic, and you are determined not to 14see any connection between the two facts? 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Well, I think the point here -- we do not 16want to spend too long on this -- he is really making is 17that the incineration capacity was three times the 18projected population of Auschwitz in 1943? 19MR IRVING: My Lord, can I ask one question on that? 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is that right, Professor van Pelt? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not -- no, the incineration capacity is 4/5ths 22per month. It is 4/5ths of the total projected population 23of the camp. So in order to justify this by typhus, we 24would have to start to assume typhus epidemics which start 25to wipe out in one month 4/5ths of the total camp 26population, which means that, in terms of filling this

. P-140

1camp up again or whatever like that, I mean, we have to -- 2the Germans would have had to ship 120,000 people to 3Auschwitz every month in order to keep ahead or even with 4the typhus epidemic. It is absurd, it is absolutely 5absurd, to use typhus as an excuse to explain the 6incineration capacity of the crematoria. 7MR IRVING: Professor van Pelt, you used the word "absurd". 8What figure are we talking about in that green column? 9How many people? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Which one? 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
The right-hand -- in the right-hand histogram? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The right-hand histogram. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
The green column? How many ---- 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is 120,000. Projected incineration capacity for 15120,000 people per month. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Approximately, so we get an idea what we are talking about 17here, that is four times Wembley stadium, that is 12,000 18tonnes of people, 12,000,000 tonnes of cadavers, that you 19are going to have to cremate with these very limited 20installations? Am I getting it right? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not want to speculate on how many tonnes and how many 22at Wembley stadium. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
You do the calculation yourself. The human body is 24roughly SPG of 1, is it not? Specific gravity of 1 25because you float in water? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes.

. P-141

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Am I right? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
So where does this bring us? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, the human body weighs what, 100 kilograms? 10 4people per tonne? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think after you have you been in Auschwitz very 6long you weigh 100 kilograms. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
OK. Say 12 people per tonne if you want to cavil, you are 8still going to end up with 10,000 tonnes of bodies to 9dispose of. This is bringing it home to you the size of 10the figures you are talking about there. That brings home 11to you the absurdity of the document you are relying on. 1210,000 tonnes of bodies. 13 If you will take it from me that it takes 30 14kilogrammes of coke to incinerate, as you say, one body, 15can you work out how many tonnes of coke we are going to 16put into those tiny coal bunkers that you can see on the 17aerial photographs to destroy, to incinerate, to cremate, 18120,000 bodies? We are talking about train loads, if not 19ship loads of coke are going to have to go into Auschwitz, 20and there is no sign of the mountains of coke on the 21photographs, do you agree? There is no sign of the 22mountains ---- 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am just trying to get all the pieces of your question 24here. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you appreciate -- let me sum it up like this -- that 26there are severe logistics problems in handling the

. P-142

1disposal of 120,000 bodies a month? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We know there were severe logistic problems during the 3Hungarian action, yes. The month of May and the month of 4June in Auschwitz, June 1944, were very difficult months. 5The logistic problems in Auschwitz were so big that they 6had to start introducing incineration pits again. Yes, it 7is very difficult to incinerate so many bodies in any 8situation because it seems to be that, one way or another, 9these crematoria did do their job as well as they could. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you are saying because the story exists, therefore, 11these figures must be right? Is this the kind of logic 12you apply? You do not say to yourself, you have 120,000 13bodies in that right-hand green column, does this not 14sound a bit odd, as 10,000 tonnes of bodies that these 15Nazis have managed to dispose of, and nothing has been 16seen of this on the air photographs, does that not strike 17you as odd? No huge columns of smoke have been seen on 18the air photographs? Does that not strike you as odd? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There is only one photograph in May, yes? 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: May '44? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May '44. These are these big -- these big transports had 22ceased when the air photographs in, what is it, in August 23and September were taken. 24MR IRVING: Can you show on these large photographs that we 25have here where they would have stored the tens of 26thousands of tonnes of coke? If they were to bury the

. P-143

1bodies, have you any idea what size the pit would have 2been? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Mr Irving, I challenge your use of the tens of thousands 4tonnes of coke. First of all, we do not know how much 5coke was delivered to Auschwitz in 1944. We do know how 6much coke was delivered into Auschwitz in 1943. We do 7also know that there is a German document, it is a 8document Zeitwei Zuvielarbeiter, Jahrling, from, what is 9it, March and April -- actually two documents, two 10calculations made in Zentralebauleitung about the coke use 11of the crematorium. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And these two documents, the amount of the coke use is 14not, as you say, 35 kilos per body. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which crematorium are we talking about? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We are talking about -- he made a calculation for all the 17crematoria. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
And he does it -- I mean, I have it -- if may consult my 20notes on this? 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, of course. 22MR IRVING: Can you say off the top of your head? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I am not going to say anything off the top of my head 24right now. It is too serious -- it is absolutely too 25serious a question. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
I agree.

. P-144

1MR JUSTICE GRAY: Is it in your report your main report? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is in my kind of informal report. 3MR RAMPTON: My Lord, it is the second half. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: The supplementary one, I see. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The supplementary... 6MR RAMPTON: The second half of the little blue... 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am sorry, I did not put a page number on it. This was 8for internal private use, and so... 9MR RAMPTON: I have paginated mine. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have it. 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have found it here. 12MR IRVING: Is this an actual document that you are going to 13produce? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is document -- no, the document is actually in Pressec. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
The document is in Pressec? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, and I think that my Pressec has a little tab to it. 17I can give the page. 18MR RAMPTON: It must be treated with great care. It is fragile 19and extremely valuable. 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I will just identify the page and then maybe it should go 21to you for inspection. The documents are -- the first 22document is on page 223 and the second document is on page 23224. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Do not bother to pass it to me. You can 25describe what you say that reveals. 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
OK. There are -- basically, there is a calculation made

. P-145

1by Jahrling who was a Zuvielarbeiter which means he is not 2in the SS hierarchy in the camp, and he talks about the 3use of coke in the crematoria. The heading is only about 4No. (ii), but ultimately he makes a calculation for all 5the crematoria, and he comes to a use per 12 hours. He 6does that for 2,800 kilos in 12 hours for crematorium 7(ii); 2,800 kilos in crematorium (iii); 932 kilos in 8crematorium (iv) and 932 kilos in crematorium (v), which 9is a total of 8,264 kilos in 12 hours. 10 Then he has made some calculation mistakes 11because a couple of days later, which is the 17th -- the 12first document is on 12th March -- he comes back to his 13calculation and what seems to have happened is that he 14made a calculation, he comes to 2,800 kilos for 15crematorium (ii), again 2,800 for crematorium (iii), 1,120 16for (iv) and 1,120 for No. (v), a total of 7,840 kilos in 1712 hours with the seven tonnes or seven-and-a-half tonnes. 18MR IRVING: Professor van Pelt, would you read the final 19paragraph of that document beginning with the word "dieses 20sind"? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Then he says, ""dieses sind spitzenleistung". 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
"These are maximum amounts, maximum figures"? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. "It is difficult to" -- [German - document not 24provided] -- "indicate how much it will be per year 25because it would not be known for how many days or how 26many hours or how many days we can, we must heat the

. P-146

1thing" which means he is prepared to give it on a daily 2basis but not more on a yearly basis because if the 3crematorium is going to be used every day or not, he does 4not know. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would you like to do the ---- 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I just finish the document, discussing the document, 7and I am happy to consider your question. In the 8paragraph above it, he says something else. [German - 9document not provided] It goes on the basis of an earlier 10thing which means that when you work constantly 11---- 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Around the block? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
--- around the clock, then the amount of coke needed is 14much less. So here we have, on the basis of this 15document, you can make a relatively simple calculation 16because we know the German document which has been 17challenged here in court ----- 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Precisely. This is what throws up the German document as 19being unreliable? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, it is not. We have two documents, one which talks 21about incineration capacity, and one which talks about the 22coke use. It is about the same buildings. On the basis 23of that, we know that, we can calculate the amount of coke 24which is going to be used per corpse which is not a happy 25calculation, I must say, but the bottom line is you come 26to three-and-a-half kilo of coke per corpse.

. P-147

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you really, sincerely believe that you can burn one 2corpse with enough coke that you could fit in one of these 3water bottles, is that what you are saying? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like to point out there are two documents which 5support this. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can you just pause for a second? 7Three-and-a-half kilos of coke per corpse, one has to put 8it? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is when the ---- 10Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
That is assuming a rate of incineration equivalent to that 11in the document of 28th June 1943 which Mr Irving 12challenges? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 14MR IRVING: Can I ask, Professor van Pelt, has it ever crossed 15your mind that this document of 28th June 1943 might not 16be authentic or a document of integrity? Did you ever 17investigate that possibility? Did you check any details 18about it? Did you just accept it at face value? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that the document is in perfect accordance with 20all the other documents. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Do you know anything about the history of that document, 22where it came from? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I do not know. Moscow, it has been in Moscow. It has 24been made available, for example, in the Vienna trial. It 25was available earlier. There was another copy of this 26document in a Didier archive in Dumburg. This document

. P-148

1has been known for many years, since shortly after the 2war. The document seems to be perfectly in line with 3other documents. It is a carbon copy. It is not on 4letter head, like most of the copies in the 5Zentralebauleitung. It seems to be sitting nice in its 6sequence of other documents. So I have no reason to doubt 7the integrity of the file or the integrity of the document 8itself. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor van Pelt, you were sitting in court yesterday 10when I challenged that document piece by piece, and 11indicated the discrepancies on the document which gave not 12just one discrepancy but several discrepancies which 13indicated there was every reason to doubt whether this was 14an original document or whether it is was, indeed, a true 15document? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
You can do that, but I have not changed my mind on this. 17I do not think that you have brought any kind of 18convincing evidence for me to change my mind on this 19document. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
May I ask you the following then, is it not surprising 21that nowhere in the entire Auschwitz construction files, 22in Moscow or in the present Auschwitz State Museum, do you 23find one single other document that reflects the same 24figures or figures of the same magnitude? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We can talk -- the issue of incineration capacity, how do 26we know about incineration capacity and how do we know

. P-149

1about the coke use? We have this document, we have 2eyewitness testimony of people who worked the ovens and we 3have statements by the people who ran the camp. There is 4a convergence between those things. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Except for one thing ---- 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Now, if you challenge, if you challenge the coke use, 7I will have to bring up, and, I am sorry, I do not have 8the particular patent, but it is a little technical 9history. There is a specificity in the design of the 10ovens in Auschwitz which is, basically, that they worked 11with compressed -- that air was blown into the muffle. 12Normally, what happens in these ovens is that ---- 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
The flame does not touch the body? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, actually frebrennen did happen in the Auschwitz ovens; 15it was not simply incineration. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, they would self-combust? When they were raised to a 17certain temperature, they would self-combust? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is the idea of a normal incineration. In Auschwitz, 19actually, the ovens -- the difference between the ovens is 20that one element which is used in normal ovens is with a 21heat kind of regenerator in Auschwitz was replaced by 22compressed air which was blown into the oven. Now ---- 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
Would this account for the drop of normal coke usage from 2435 kilograms in the crematorium Gussen concentration camp 25per body to 3.5 in Auschwitz, in your opinion? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, and I think the normal use for Gussen questions the

. P-150

1normal use of what? For one, two, three, four bodies in a 2day at a certain moment very high intensity use. I just 3would like to quote here from a piece which John Claude 4Pressac wrote and I also worked on. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I interrupt? I did not quite catch what you said 6about Gussen. What did you say was the normal rate in 7Gussen? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The normal rate, the question is what is normal rate? If 9you just fire the ovens in Auschwitz for one corpse, you 10probably need 300 kilos. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
In Gussen they were talking, if my memory of the document 12is correct, of the order of 100 bodies, or possibly 200. 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If you bring the documents, we can discuss the documents. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, Professor van Pelt, you were not quoting a document 15there. You were just stating a figure, speculating. 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am going to state a figure and it is from a patent. 17I am happy to show you the passage. The big issue in 18crematorium design is that you need to get the thing 19going, the oven going, and that takes a hell of a lot 20energy. So, if you incinerate one body, and this is a 21document which is prepared for Dachau in 1939, to cremate 22one body in Dachau was 175 kilos of coke, far exceeding 23the 30 kilos. However, it says that, by the time you have 24started this incinerator, after you have incinerated a 25number of bodies, and I will quote the thing, "If the cold 26room required 170 kilograms of coke to start up a new

. P-151

1incineration, it needed only 100 kilo if it had been used 2the day before. The second and third incineration on the 3same would not require any extra fuel, thanks to the 4compressed air". Those that followed would call for only 5small amounts of extra energy. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are you saying that for the cremations on the second and 7third day you would not have to put any coke into the 8machine at all? It would just kind of carry on? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. If you start incinerating on the second day you can 10still use that heat that had built up from the first day. 11If you then insert extra bodies in the oven that same day, 12after the first one, you only need very little extra fuel. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is not what the document said. You said it needed 14none at all. 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Then it says only little, the first, second and third, and 16then, as you continue, then only very limited amount of 17fuel. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
But of course they had more than just one furnace in 19Auschwitz. In each of these crematoria you are telling us 20they had five times three. So they did not have to fire 21them all up. They could just fire up one of them and keep 22it running? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But it seems that there were more bodies than one could 24take. We also have, of course, the patent application of 25Topf from late 1942, which actually operates on that whole 26principle.

. P-152

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
It was not used, was it? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, but it was based on the experience gained. As it very 3literally says, it is based on the experience gained with 4the multi-muffle ovens used in the East. The document -- 5I am happy to try to find it. I do not know where the 6patent application is. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
I do not want do keep flogging this particular horse 8unless his Lord wants to go down this route much further. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am inevitably being guided by you, 10Mr. Irving. You must put your case. 11MR IRVING: I would like to ask Professor Van Pelt to do one 12calculation f0or me. On the basis of 8,000 kilogram of 13coke, which we read in that document in the Pressac book, 147,000 or 8,000 kilogrammes of coke per 12 hour shift, if 15we were to assume 35 kilograms of coke per body, how many 16bodies were actually being cremated per day in those four 17crematoria? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If you were to assume -- I have the figure here -- if it 19was three and a half kilos of coke ---- 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
No, 35. 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Three and a half I calculated was 241,000 bodies, so 35 22would be 24,000 bodies. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
24,000? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not have to make the calculation because it is right 25here. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
I do not think that is correct. If it is 7,000 kilograms

. P-153

1of coke, 7,000 times 35 into 7,000 is 200, so it will be 2200 per day? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am sorry. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
It would be 200 bodies per day in these crematoria so that 5would give us the lower level. I am not saying that was 6the amount. I am saying that is the lower limit of these 7two figures we have. We have the figure of ten times as 8large that you offer, and we have the figure of 200 per 9day which would be, if the Gussen figure applied, the 35 10kilograms of coke, which is what crematorium managers 11assure us is the normal figure nowadays for mass 12cremations. 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
My Lord, I am very surprised that Mr Irving seems to love 14German documents. When he is confronted with a German 15document which he does not like, so easily ignores it. 16I think the Jahrling document is very, very 17straightforward. There are two version of it. If 18Jahrling made a mistake, he corrected himself. Obviously 19when you find a document like that, you take it seriously. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: You are now talking about the one with J A 21umlaut at the top? 22MR IRVING: The one that we challenge, my Lord. 23MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. You call it the Jahrling document 24Jahrling was the secretary? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Jahrling was the man who made the calculation. 26MR IRVING: Yes. There are other reasons for challenging it

. P-154

1but I just rested my case on the reference line across the 2top, which contained enough errors to make the whole thing 3very suspect. To try and do these calculations the other 4way round, which is what the witness has done, I find this 5perverse. 6 Can we move on from there now, my Lord? 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: Of course. 8MR IRVING: Let me come back to the question of the 9eyewitnesses who have described, either to you or to 10historians over the last 55 years in convincing and 11compelling detail, the procedure at the factory of death, 12at crematorium number 2, the arrival of the victims, what 13happened inside the crematoria, the cremation process, the 14robbing of the bodies and so on. How many eye witnesses 15are we talking about, Professor? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It depends on which period we are looking. In my report 17I only looked at the very, very early testimonies. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Which means testimonies taken by Dragon, and in this case 20by Tauber, because they are taken in April and May 1945. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are they independent of each other or have they compared 22notes in any way? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know if they compared notes. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Did they escape? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They escaped, yes. No, they did not escape. In the sense 26that they were on the march, I think, from Auschwitz to

. P-155

1wherever they ended up in the West, they did escape but 2they did not escape from the camp itself or from the 3crematoria. 4MR IRVING: Yes. So that Dragon, D R A G O N, and Heinrich 5Tauber? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Schloma Dragon. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
How many others? You are not relying just on those two 8eyewitnesses, surely? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, but these are the two which I mentioned because, if 10one is afraid of pollination and things like that, and 11these were testimonies given immediately after the war. 12These were testimonies which were made before things were 13published, before things were in the newspapers or 14whatever like that. Other testimonies have been given, 15Filip Muller of course in the 1960s. He made one in 1946. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
You said that nothing had been in the newspapers. When 17was the report published of the War Refugee Board on the 18testimony given by Veroba and Wetzler, two Slovaks? Was 19that not November 1944? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but these were very, very short. These were very 21short things in the newspaper. The report itself was 22never published at the time. So to have a short New York 23Times one column article or less about a fact that there 24is an extermination camp in Auschwitz does not give any 25details about the extermination procedure. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
You say the report was not published at the time. In fact

. P-156

1the War Refugee Board in the United States did actually 2publish the report like a White Paper. Whether the 3newspapers actually quoted it in detail or not, are you 4saying the newspapers did not quote it very much? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They did not quote very much. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
But they did give the more lurid details about the gas 7chambers and so on? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
As far as I remember, the reports, reading the newspaper 9articles, they did not give the kind of details which 10would inspire a person to invent a particular gassing or 11incineration procedure. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Procedure, right. You did not rest in either your book or 13your expert report on just those two eyewitnesses though, 14did you? Not just on Tauber and ---- 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. There are other people we quote because, of course, 16after afterwards other people came forward. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did you rely on a woman called Bimko? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have already addressed this once before. I mentioned 19Miss Bimko because of the testimony she gave at the 20Lindenberg trial, which is the Belsen trial. I did not 21rely on her to come to a conclusion about the incineration 22capacity in the crematoria. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am not talking about the incineration capacity, 24Professor. I am talking now about the actual procedure, 25the way people walk ---- 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we have moved on. We are just

. P-157

1talking generally about eye witness evidence, are we not? 2MR IRVING: We are dealing with the question of the integrity 3of eyewitnesses, my Lord. 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is what I was suggesting. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, I did not rely on her for procedure. 6MR IRVING: Bimko was going to be called in the Tesh case, was 7she not, in April 1946 against the manufacturer of Zyklon 8B, but in fact eventually they did not call her as a 9witness. They just put in her report as an affidavit, is 10that correct? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you read the Tesh trial? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have read significant parts of the Tesh trial because of 14the evidence given by Alfred Sohn. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
You quoted parts of the Bimko testimony in your report. 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, because I wanted to show the kind of statements which 17were made about Auschwitz in 1945. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
Did you, Professor van Pelt, quote all relevant parts of 19the Bimko testimony? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
What do you mean? Relevant to what? 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Well, relevant to enable the reader to form a judgment as 22to whether Bimko was telling the truth or not. 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This was not my intention. My point in the expert report 24at that moment was to give a sense to the reader, or to 25the judge more particularly, of what was the kind of 26evidence available at that moment in the courts and so

. P-158

1on. I did not write a critique of Bimko. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you were painting with a broad brush? 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I was not painting with a broad brush. I tried to give a 4very simple kind of picture of what people were saying. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
If Bimko had put in her report some detail that totally 6discredited the quality of her report, then you would of 7course have quoted it? You would not have ignored it? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. Then it is very clear that she gives this testimony, 9and then the testimony is what is being said at that 10moment. It is part of what is being said about 11Auschwitz. I also quoted Polavoy. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can we stay with Bimko for the moment? 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: Let us stick with Bimko. Mr Irving, if you 14are suggesting that she did discredit herself in some way, 15I think it is only right that you should give Professor 16van Pelt the opportunity of answering whatever it is you 17say discredited her. 18MR IRVING: I believe I am leading the evidence the correct 19way, my Lord. The next two questions will bring the 20matter to light. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: Good. 22MR IRVING: Professor van Pelt, in the gas chambers at 23Auschwitz was the gas introduced from cylinders, as in 24oxygen cylinders, or carbon monoxide cylinders, through 25pipes into the gas chamber? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. It was ----

. P-159

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
To your knowledge? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
We are talking about which gas chamber? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
The gas chamber described by Bimko. 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Then let's look at the text of Bimko and then I will 5comment on it. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
You said you have read Bimko's testimony. 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but in principle I am not going to discuss things 8I do not have in front of me. 9Q.
[Mr Irving]
Let me put the question more generally, Professor van 10Pelt. In any gas chambers in Auschwitz, in any of the gas 11chambers so-called at Auschwitz, was gas introduced into 12the chambers through pipes from cylinders? 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
And yet Bimko stated that, did she not, in her report? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Let us look at what Bimko actually says. Then we can come 16to the conclusion if that is what she actually said. I am 17not going to comment on a text I do not have in front of 18me. If you want to raise this issue, which I think is a 19very legitimate issue, give me the text and we will look 20at it together. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
Let me put it other way round then, Professor. If there 22was such a sentence in that report, you did not quote it, 23did you? You stopped. 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know any more exactly what I quoted and what not. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
You stopped just short of that particular sentence? 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got it in court?

. P-160

1MR IRVING: Not in front of me, my Lord. I am derelict in that 2respect unless Miss Rogers can find it at short notice in 3her usually efficient way. I shall have to bring it 4tomorrow. Your Lordship can take it as said. Although I 5am not a member of the Bar, I would certainly not lead 6this evidence if it was not in the files. The evidence of 7Bimko is notorious for the fact, and this is one reason 8why she was not introduced as a witness at the Tesh 9trial. She would have been cross-examined on that point. 10 So this is one document, one eyewitness account, 11which is very suspect. But, Professor van Pelt, I put it 12to you that you left that sentence out of the report 13because it would have discredited the rest of her 14testimony, would it not? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think that, if you would look -- you are now trying to 16go to my motivation. In my expert report I have tried to 17give an account of what was said, in order to draw a 18picture of how the image of Auschwitz developed in 1944 19and 1945. I have also included Polovoy's account done on 20the liberation of Auschwitz which again, as we probably 21both agree, contains a lot of friction. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is this the Pravda account? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Can we not track this down because it must be 25in court somewhere, presumably? Bimko's statement? It is 26note 407 on page 268.

. P-161

1MR IRVING: Somebody can find the original document. 2MR JUSTICE GRAY: Otherwise we leave all these points hanging 3in mid air. 4MR RAMPTON: Mr Irving is quite right. Mr Irving knows where 5everything is. It is bundle H 2 (ii). 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Could we get it out and then dispose of this 7point one way or another, Mr Irving? I think it is 8better, do you not? 9MR IRVING: It is going to continue to hover like a vulture or 10an albatross across the court. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is the problem. 12MR RAMPTON: What I said is accurate, except to this extent. 13When I say "it", all I have is a page and three-quarters 14of what Ada Bimko duly said. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: Have you got page 68? 16MR RAMPTON: No. I have page 67. It is split up, that is 17all. I am sorry, there is lots more than I thought there 18was. If your Lordship goes -- 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have not got it yet. I would like it. 20(Same handed) thank you very much. 21MR RAMPTON: Yes. H 2 (iv) and turn to footnote 404, one sees 22the beginning of it. 408. Has your Lordship found 23footnote 404? 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes I have deposition of Dr Bimko. 25MR RAMPTON: Yes. You have got on 405, which is page 66 of the 26document itself, 5th day, Friday 21st September 1945, Ada

. P-162

1Bimko sworn, examined by Colonel Backhouse. Has your 2Lordship got that? 3MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 4MR RAMPTON: That stops and then it begins again, further 5deposition of Ada Bimko on page 741 of the document, and 6that stops on page 742. 7MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am afraid the relevant bit, or the bit that 8Mr Irving wants, has been cut off. 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I have it here. I have it in note 408. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: 467? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Footnote 408, I presume that is the section that he refers 12to, because it is talking about cylinders. 13MR IRVING: "In a corner of the room were two large cylinders. 14The SS man told me the cylinders contained the gas which 15passed through the pipes into the gas cylinder." That is 16on page 742, my Lord, in paragraph 4. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, I have it. 18MR IRVING: There was no such equipment in Auschwitz, was 19there? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. 21Q.
[Mr Irving]
You did not quote this in your version of the report? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
This report is not a discussion on the quality of 23eyewitness testimony. I have told you that before. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but this is a discussion now, Professor van Pelt. 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
OK. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
On the quality of eyewitness testimony. It is a

. P-163

1temptation we all fall into probably. Sometimes we want 2to use the rest of the report because we like it, but 3there is something nasty in the report that, if we are 4going to manipulate, then we will leave it out. Is that 5not so? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. I mean, the question is there are many differences. 7First of all, let us go over this text. "Let us go over 8the text right now. We then walk back. Basically they 9went through the gas chamber and it was rather dark in 10there at the time. They could not see the far end of the 11passage. There were two rails leading from the door of 12the gas chamber down the passage. On these two rails was 13a flap top wagon. The SS man told me that the wagon was 14used to take the dead bodies from the gas chamber to the 15crematorium at the other end of the passage. We then 16walked through the gas chamber and undressing room to the 17door where it entered the building. Near this door were 18some stairs. We went up these stairs and came to a room 19above the gas chamber. Across this room were two pipes, 20each about three inches thick. I did not notice whether 21there were any branch pipes leading from them. The SS man 22told me that the pipes that were in the floor were 23connected to the spray fittings in the gas chamber below. 24In the corner of the room were two large cylinders but 25I did not notice whether the cylinders were connected to 26the pipes. The SS man told me that the cylinders

. P-164

1contained the gas which passed through the pipes into the 2gas chamber and I then left the room". 3 We are basically talking here about crematorium 4number 4. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: And the room is a room above the gas chamber? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 7MR IRVING: Yes. But is any of this true, what the SS man 8allegedly told her? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The SS man was mocking her because she was looking at a 10new ventilation system which had been introduced to suck 11out air from the two gas chambers above the gas chambers 12of crematorium 4. A ventilation system had been created 13in 1944 to improve the ventilation of crematoria 4 and 5 14because they had not been equipped with the ventilation 15system. What happened is that she is shown the 16ventilation system and this SS man is mocking her by 17suggesting that this actually, instead of taking the air 18out, is taking the gas inside of the---- 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
That is not what she says, Professor van Pelt. Is what 20she says not, "In a corner of the room were two large 21cylinders"? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But there was a ventilator up there which I presume would 23be in the cylinder and I do not think she is a 24specialist. She sees this thing above the gas chamber. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
But you have no evidence ---- 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The only thing is that she believed what the SS man told

. P-165

1here, this equipment was there. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
You have no evidence that he was mocking her, do you? You 3appreciate that men were hanged on the basis of this 4testimony? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know on the basis of what men are hanged. What 6I do know is that in crematoria 4 and 5 above the gas 7chamber in 1944 was a ventilation system. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
To extract the air or the gas from those rooms. That is 10what she saw. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
We do not know that. That is not what she says here. 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But how do you expect a person who has no technical 13education to distinguish one pipe from another pipe? 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not an equally plausible explanation that she is 15just inventing this story, and that she assumed this is 16the way that the gas chambers so-called operated, that gas 17came in through pipes? 18MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, inventing the whole story or just 19this bit? 20MR IRVING: This particular element of it. She is embellishing, 21she may well have had an experience of being taken into 22the mortuary and seen the dead bodies lying around, which 23is, God knows, unpleasant enough, and she has now 24embellished on it, because she is now in British captivity 25or in British hands, being well looked after, and they 26have asked her to write a statement a deposition, because

. P-166

1they needed to hang these criminals. 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The issue, I think, is that the first question we have to 3ask is if that system actually existed. Now Pressac and 4I have published a diagram of that situation in the 5crematorium, in this case crematorium 5, crematorium 4 is 6a slightly different one, where we actually talk about a 7pipe, and we see actually the ventilator sitting in a 8housing. Now it is obvious that she saw something and 9that what she probably saw is that ventilation system, and 10that ventilation system which is connected to the ceiling 11of the gas chambers, it is very difficult at that moment 12to determine if it is something where the gas goes from an 13outside source, where the ventilator is from there inside 14of the gas chamber or the other way round. I do not want 15to speculate on what the SS man told her or not. But 16certainly I could imagine that he would have wanted to 17scare her by saying this is the way the gas chamber 18operates, this is how the gas goes into the gas chamber. 19MR IRVING: Your imagination is not evidence in this court room 20and I would ask you to adhere to what you know. 21MR RAMPTON: That is not right. His motivation for the way he 22wrote the report is under attack. What he thinks she may 23have meant by what she said is directly relevant. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think, if you are attacking the motivation 25of Professor van Pelt, I am afraid Mr Rampton is right. 26MR IRVING: Very well. Did it not strike you as being

. P-167

1inaccurate that she described this scene in this 2particular way when quite clearly you knew from your own 3expert knowledge that this apparatus did not exist and 4that this therefore devalued the quality of the rest of 5her testimony? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know if it really devalues it because, if she 7goes into the crematorium and she sees a detail which is 8hidden to everyone else because it sits above the ceiling 9and you have to go up to the attic, if she sees that, and 10we know from the blue print that the thing was there, or 11at least that it was installed, then it means that first 12of all it is absolutely clear that she was in that 13building and that she at least on that detail is a very 14reliable witness, even if she did not know what it was 15used for and took the evidence or the remark of an SS man 16on face value. I must say, if there were more witness 17like that, I think then probably one would not need many 18courts to determine all kinds of disputes between people. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
I can read out just one sentence from paragraph 740. "I 20set out here afterward I myself observed with regard to 21mass exterminations I will name the persons, each of whom 22is individually selected." She is putting the finger on 23people here, is she not? Page 740, paragraph 1. 24Mrs Bimko is putting the finger on people she knew at the 25camp. 26 I draw your attention to paragraph 7 on the

. P-168

1opposite page, 741 while we are here: "In August 1943 2I saw SS man Tauber knock down a girl who arrived late at 3roll call, beat her and kick her and stand on her stomach 4for ten minutes until she died". Assuming for a moment 5that this story is true, is that the same SS man, Tauber, 6on whom you rely as an eye witness? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No. I am relying on the Sonderkommando Tauber. 8MR JUSTICE GRAY: This Tauber is a rapport Fuhrer? 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It seems to be so, yes, number 12. 10MR IRVING: What is a rapport Fuhrer? 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is a man who is in charge of roll call. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
In charge of roll call, very well. Can we now proceed 13please to the further eyewitnesses on whom you rely for 14your description of the liquidation procedure in 15crematorium 2? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Perry Broad? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not think that Perry Broad described crematorium 2. 19We would have to look at Perry Broad. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. He described two or three liquidations, one from a 21range of I think 40 yards. 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
He described the Red Cross van coming, yes. Then Tauber 23is very important. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
On crematorium 2? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Crematorium 2, the early one. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
What does Tauber tell us about the liquidation procedure

. P-169

1of crematorium 2 from the arrival of the victims? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Do you want me to read the whole thing? 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
No, just your recapitulation unless you wish to read it? 4MR JUSTICE GRAY: I would quite like to have a quick look. 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Let us take Tauber at hand. 6Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
177 to 196? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
177, thank you, my Lord. 8Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
The incineration procedure is at 186. 9A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
So Tauber was interrogated at the end of May 1945. 10Heinrich Tauber was a sonderkommando in crematorium 11number 2. We are going to discuss crematorium 2. It 12starts on page 182 of my report. 13MR IRVING: Of your report? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Of my report, yes. What he describes there is an 15underground arrangement of crematorium 2 which he 16describes as an undressing room and bunker or, in other 17words, a gas chamber: 18 "To go from one cellar to the other there, 19there was a corridor in which there came from the exterior 20a (double) stairway and a slide for throwing the bodies 21that were brought to the camp to be incinerated in the 22crematorium. People went through the door of the 23undressing room into the corridor, then from there through 24a door on the right into the gas chamber. A second 25stairway running from the grounds of the crematorium gave 26access to the corridor. To the left of the stairway in

. P-170

1the corner, there was a little room with hair spectacles 2and other effects were stored. On the right there was 3another small room used as a store for Zyklon-B. In the 4right-hand corner of the corridor, on the wall facing the 5door from the undressing room, there was a lift to 6transport corpses. People went from the crematorium yard 7the undressing room via a stairway, surrounded by iron 8rails. Over the door there was a sign which the 9inscription 'Zum Baden und Desinfektion' (to bath and 10disinfection), written in several languages. In the 11undressing room, there were wooden benches and numbered 12clothes hooks along the walls. There were no windows and 13the lights were on all the time. The undressing room also 14had water taps drains for the waste water. From the 15undressing room people went into the corridor through a 16door above which was hung a sign marked 'Zum Bade', 17repeated in several languages. I remember the [Russian] 18word 'banya' was there too. From the corridor they went 19through the door on the right into the gas chamber. It 20was a wooden door, made of two layers of short pieces of 21wood arranged like parquet. Between these layers there 22was a single sheet of material sealing the edges of the 23door and the rabbets of the frame were also fitted with 24sealing strips of felt. 25 "At about head height for an average man this 26door had a round glass peephole. On the other side of the

. P-171

1door, that is on the gas chamber side, this opening was 2protected by a hemispherical grid. The grid was fitted 3because the people in the gas chamber, feeling they were 4going to die, used to break the glass of the peephole. 5But the grid still did not provide sufficient protection 6and similar incidents recurred. The opening was blocked 7with a piece of metal or wood. The people going to be 8gassed and those in the gas chamber damaged the electrical 9installations, tearing the cables out and damaging the 10ventilation equipment. 11 "The door was closed hermetically from the 12corridor side by means of iron bars which were screwed 13tight. The roof of the gas chamber was supported by 14concrete pillars running down the middle of its length." 15MR IRVING: This is roof we can see on the big photograph here, 16right? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 18Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is that self-same roof? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That same roof, yes, but we look now at the top. "On 20either side of these pillars there were four others, two 21on each side. The sides of these pillars which went up 22through the roof were of heavy wire mesh." 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
What does it mean when it says "the pillars went up 24through the roof"? Went up to the roof, presumably? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but they popped out above the roof. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
The pillars popped out?

. P-172

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, so the pillars went through a hole in the roof and 2then they went in through, basically the earth which was 3assembled on top of the roof, and then there was a little 4kind of chimney on top of that. 5Q.
[Mr Irving]
On top of a pillar? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
On top of a pillar. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
What was the purpose of that, architecturally speaking? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Because these were hollow pillars and these were the 9pillars where Zyklon-B was inserted into the gas chamber. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
Just so the court can hear what Professor van Pelt is 11saying, these were hollow pillars? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
These were hollow pillars. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Made of what, concrete? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
These were made of metal. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
These are the wire mesh pillars you are now talking about? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not the concrete pillars supporting the roof? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, these are the wire mesh pillars which are connected on 19either side of these pillars. These pillars, that is in 20the sentence before, we have concrete pillars which go 21down the middle of the length and one of these pillars is 22still there holding up a bit of the roof, and then 23connected to these concrete pillars, there are seven of 24them, connected to four of them were wire mesh metal 25pillars, two on one side and two on the other side. 26Q.
[Mr Irving]
My Lord, I gave you a large yellow map which shows the

. P-173

1layout. You can see the pillars there with the wire mesh 2columns next to them. It is one of the large yellow maps. 3There are two yellow maps. That is the one, my Lord. If 4I can just interrupt you, there is a room there numbered 5No. 9 and No. 10. What do you call that, an axonometric 6view? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
An axonometric view, yes. 8Q.
[Mr Irving]
In other words, a kind of exploded view of the 9Leichenkeller No. 1, am I correct? This is, just to 10remind the court, the one we have seen in the photographs 11with the collapsed roof? 12A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, No. 9 and 10. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. It has a number of concrete columns, and you have 14drawn in those wire mesh columns, have you not? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I mean the whole thing is a drawing by one of my students 16of the whole building. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Yes, but the wire mesh is an addition; it is not based on 18any drawings or blue prints, is it? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is drawn on, it is based on the drawing made by the man 20who actually made these pillars and who gave testimony in 21Poland shortly before Mr Taiber. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Are they round pillars or square pillars? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Square pillars. 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Have you any idea, can you tell the dimension of the 25pillar was, the wire mesh? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I will have to consult Mr Kuhler's testimony which is ----

. P-174

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is quite important. 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Then I will consult his testimony on that. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
While you are consulting, can you tell us was it just one 4layer of wire mesh or several concentric layers of wire 5mesh? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There was concentric layers of wire mesh. 7Q.
[Mr Irving]
Two, three, four, five, six? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I think there were -- basically there were two layers 9creating, basically, a narrow space inside, a wire mesh 10cage around it and another air space with a wire mesh cage 11around it, and then there was a kind of thing which moves 12up and down inside that inner hollow space. 13Q.
[Mr Irving]
So let me get this straight, how many actual concentric 14tubes are we concerned with or wire tubes, two or three 15inside each other? 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There is an outer one. There is an inner one and I think 17then there was one inside that, and there was this movable 18thing which could go up and down. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
What is the purpose of having so many layers? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
According to the testimony, it was to allow for a more 21even spread of the Zyklon-B in the gas chamber. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
What was the thickness of the wire? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The thickness of the wire changed as you went from the 24inside to the outside. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not right that the thickness of the wire was 3 26millimetres the whole way through?

. P-175

1A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not recall that right now. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
So if you have a wire mesh made of 3 millimetres, you have 3in fact a 6 millimetre thickness of that particular layer, 4because the wire mesh overlaps? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I presume so, but again I would like to see -- there is 6basically one very particular piece of eyewitness 7evidence, so we can look at eyewitness evidence and then 8we can reconstruct exactly how thick those wire mesh 9columns are. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
This is why I was asking what the overall dimensions of 11these alleged wire mesh columns were, so we could form an 12impression of their practicability. 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Let us look at Kuhler's testimony. If we can stop reading 14the Taiber testimony. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: I want you at some stage to complete reading 16Taiber. 17MR IRVING: Can we continue reading Taiber then, my Lord? That 18is probably a good idea. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Then you come back to the wire mesh columns. 20MR IRVING: We have to come back to the wire mesh columns 21tomorrow. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page 183, just complete it to the end of 23184. 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
"The sides of these pillars which went up through the roof 25were of heavy wire mesh. Inside this grid, there was 26another other fine mesh and inside of that further very

. P-176

1fine mesh. Inside this last mesh cage there was a 2removable can that was pulled out with a wire to recover 3the pellets from which the gas had evaporated. Besides 4that in the gas chamber there were electric wires running 5along the two sides of the main beam supported by the 6central concrete pillars. The ventilation was installed 7in the walls of the gas chamber. Communication between 8the room and the ventilation installation proper were 9through small holes along the top and bottom of the side 10walls. These lower openings were protected by a kind of 11muzzle, the upper ones by whitewash perforated metal 12plates", and these are plates, some of six were found and 13analysed by the Krakau Forensic Institute. 14MR IRVING: That is your presumption? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is my presumption. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
You have no reason for saying that, saying that these are 17identical, other than your presumption? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It seems that the description of these plates is exactly 19the same, of the ones which were analysed in Krakau. 20 "The ventilation system of the gas chamber was 21coupled to ventilation ducts installed in the undressing 22room. This ventilation system, which also served as a 23dissection room, was driven by electric motors in the roof 24space of the crematorium. 25 "The water tap was in the corridor and a rubber 26hose was run from it to wash floor of the gas chamber. At

. P-177

1the end of 1943 the gas chamber was divided in two by a 2brick wall to make it possible to gas smaller transports. 3In the dividing wall there was a door identical to that 4between the corridor and original gas chamber. Small 5transports were gassed in the chamber furthest from the 6entrance from the corridor. 7MR IRVING: I would like to stop you there, if I may, and now 8ask you what Taiber has actually told us about the gassing 9procedure. 10MR JUSTICE GRAY: We have not quite finished yet. Can we just 11go to the middle of 184, and then that is a convenient 12point I think to ask that question. 13MR IRVING: Very well, my Lord, yes. 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
"The undressing room and the gas chamber were covered 15first with a concrete slab and then with a layer of soil 16sown with grass. There were four small chimneys, the 17openings through which the gas was thrown in that rose 18above gas chamber." 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
So this is the roof we are looking at on these large 20colour photographs, is that correct? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, or the remains of the roof to be very precise. 22"These openings were closed by concrete covers with two 23handles." 24Q.
[Mr Irving]
Not wooden, concrete covers? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is what it says, yes. "Over the undressing room the 26ground was higher than the level of the yard and perfectly

. P-178

1flat. The ventilation ducts led to pipes and the chimneys 2located in the part of the building above the corridor and 3undressing room. I would point out that at first the 4undressing room had neither benches nor clothes hooks and 5there were no showers in the gas chamber. These fittings 6were not installed until Autumn 1943 in order to 7camouflage the undressing room and the gas chamber as a 8bathing and disinfestation facility. The showers were 9fitted to small blocks of wood sealed into the concrete of 10the gas chamber. There were no pipes connected to the 11showers from which no water ever flowed. 12 "As I have already said, there was a lift in 13the corridor or rather a goods hoist. A temporary hoist 14installed pending delivery of the electric lift to carry 15the corpses to the ground floor." End of quotation. 16Q.
[Mr Irving]
That final paragraph is quite interesting, is it not, 17because we now have the documents giving the actual dates 18for the arrival of the provisional lift. I believe it was 19finally ready in September 1943, is that correct? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
No, it was ready in March. The history of the lift is a 21very confused history, because they did not get the lift 22they wanted. They had the lift installed originally for 23750 kilograms carrying capacity, and then they tried to 24improve on that one, since it did not seem to be enough, 25by doubling the cables on which this lift, it was 26basically a kind of building site hoist, so that it could

. P-179

1carry 1500 kilograms. This was all in something like 2March 1943. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
Very well. So we have heard the description from Henrich 4Taiber of the liquidation procedure. On what other 5eyewitnesses did you base the ---- 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am sorry I will have to interrupt you, 7Mr Irving. I think if you have a case to put in relation 8to Taiber, that he is unreliable or that for some reason 9his account is not to be credited, I think it is right 10that you should put it. 11MR IRVING: Very well. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: It may be your case is simply that all the 13eyewitnesses are to be treated with caution and you go no 14further. 15MR IRVING: I was go to treat them all summarily, in the same 16manner, and just ask the simple question, did they all 17give the same description in broad terms of people going 18up on the roof opening these manhole covers, pouring the 19cyanide capsules in. If I may ask the question like that, 20the eyewitnesses that you have, Taiber, which other ones 21would you rely on? 22A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
In this case, as you mentioned Broad describes seeing it 23from some distance. Then later there are eyewitnesses who 24have been, other sonderkommando who would have made 25statements later, in 1960s, and of course Muller with his 26original statement for 1946 which is in the book by Kuhler

. P-180

1and then ---- 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Of course if they make their statements in the 1960s there 3is the danger of cross-pollination, is there not? 4A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That is why I limited myself at the moment for this 5particular case to look at the very early ones. I must 6say that as an historian I am quite delighted to find 7people who seem to be as observant as Mr Taiber actually 8as a witness giving with very fresh this thing in his 9memory his statement in May 1945 to Judge Sehn. 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
It is almost as though Jan Sehn held the blueprints in 11front of him and said: "So they went from here, to there, 12through this door and then this and this and this 13happened", is that right? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I do not know. I mean I do not know what happened. I do 15not know what happened in that room. Certainly the Taiber 16testimony is largely convergent with the blueprints. 17However, when Taiber starts talking about, for example, 18either the gassing procedure or the incineration procedure 19of course, then that is not in the blueprints and very 20important the wire mesh columns are not in the blueprints 21either. We have that from a different source. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
So these wire mesh columns, so it is plain what we are 23saying, what size were they? We have not nailed it down. 24In rough terms 10 inches across from side to side? 25A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
They were probably, I mean again I want to try to find 26Kuhler, but they were probably the same thickness as the

. P-181

1structural columns supporting the roof. 2Q.
[Mr Irving]
Which is quite a substantial size. These wire mesh 3columns that are going to go up to the roof where the hole 4is through which the cyanide capsules are being poured? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. Yes. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: Before we have leave Taiber, I am sorry to 7interrupt you again, Mr Irving, he gives a detailed 8account of the incineration procedure which you have set 9out at page 186 of your report, is that right? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Let me just get to 186. 11MR RAMPTON: Is the witness looking for Kuhler, in which case 12I can tell him where it is? 13MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am asking him to look for something else. 14MR RAMPTON: I am sorry. It is 196 to 198 and 516 to 517. 15MR JUSTICE GRAY: We will have to deal with Kuhler tomorrow. 16MR IRVING: I only wanted to know roughly what size of wire 17mesh we are talking about, what the width of this column 18going up to the ceiling was. We have probably got a 19pretty clear picture of kind of thing it was; larger than 20a drainpipe. 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. Kuhler says these columns were around 3 metres high 22and they 70 metres square. 23Q.
[Mr Irving]
70 metres? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
70 centimetres. 25Q.
[Mr Irving]
The wire mesh columns? 26A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes.

. P-182

1Q.
[Mr Irving]
70 centimetres is of the order of 2 feet 6 inches? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, a little less, 2 feet three inches. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
So this hole in the roof or these holes in the roof, how 4many wire mesh columns were there, four? 5A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Four. 6Q.
[Mr Irving]
So the holes in the roof would have been up to 2 foot 6 7inches across? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Absolutely not, because the whole column may be 2 feet 4 9inches, but Zyklon-B is only introduced right in the 10centre piece. The centre piece, we have concentric 11columns, so ultimately the centre piece can be a rather 12narrow thing, so the hole through the roof could have been 13a relatively narrow pipe. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
But we are told here he had a concrete cover with two 15handles covering this whole, which rather suggests 16something larger than a tennis ball? 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But the concrete cover, we have a picture of these actual 18chimneys in the documents. Of course you do not when you 19create this pipe which comes up out the centre of the wire 20mesh columns, of course you take a larger kind of little 21chimney around it. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: As a funnel? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
As a funnel, yes. Like a chimney itself always is wider 24than the actual smoke channel going through it. 25MR IRVING: Yes. So you are saying there was a relatively 26small hole or four small holes smaller than 2 foot six

. P-183

1inches across then, and after they had spent all this 2money building this underground crematorium with all the 3problems of damp that is implicit in that, somebody was 4allowed to come along after the event, because it was not 5included in the drawings, and knock holes in right next to 6the supporting pillars? 7A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I did not say that. The crematorium roof, as we know from 8other documents, there were problems with finishing the 9crematorium, roofs of the Leichenkeller, in December of 101942 and January 1943. We actually have photos of the 11completion of the roof. 12Q.
[Mr Irving]
But this is not the question. 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I finish? No, but the thing is you assert that 14they knocked holes inside the roof of the gas chamber. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Through the roof. 16A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
That did not happen. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Through the roof? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Through the roof. Well, the modification and design had 19been made before that roof was completed. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
What modification? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The roof of the gas chamber, or morgue No. 1, and the roof 22of morgue No. 2, later the undressing room, were only 23completed in December and January, in December 1942 and 24January 1943, by which time the modification of the 25building into a genocidal extermination machine had 26already been decided on. But they did not have to make

. P-184

1holes in the roof because the roof was not yet complete at 2the time. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
But if you were an architect, and neither of us is an 4architect, and some SS Rottenfuhrer comes along and says, 5"I am going to knock four holes in the roof right next to 6the supporting pillars", what would you have told that 7man? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
May I just point out that if we look here at, for example, 9that column and that column, there is a beam supporting, 10connecting the two columns. Of course it is going to be a 11real problem when you go right through the beam you weaken 12the beam. That is one of the reasons that these columns 13are placed next to the column, so that they do not 14challenge the structural integrity of the main beam. If 15they had been -- may I point it out? 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I think I understand what you are 17saying. 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I am just going to make a drawing here. This is the gas 19chamber. The columns are right here. The structural beam 20sits right on top of that. So your point is absolutely 21valid if you put the columns right there, but if you put 22the grid columns right here, then there is absolutely no 23structural, the structural integrity of the roof is in no 24way challenged. 25MR IRVING: Professor van Pelt, we are wasting our time really, 26are we not? There were never any holes in that roof.

. P-185

1There are no holes in that roof today. There were never 2four holes through that roof. They cannot have poured 3cyanide capsules through that roof. The concrete evidence 4is still there. You yourself have stood on that roof and 5looked for those holes and not found them. Our experts 6have stood on that roof and not found them. The holes 7were never there. What do you have say to that? 8A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would just say why do we not put up the picture of the 9roof and look at the roof in the present condition? The 10roof is a mess. The roof is absolutely a mess. A large 11part of the roof is in fragments. The concrete has many 12different colours. You pretend that you are talking about 13a piece which is intact. It is not. 14Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I remind what you have written in your book? 15A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
It is impossible to determine nowadays what was the 16situation of that roof in 1945. 17Q.
[Mr Irving]
Can I remind what you have written in your expert report 18for this case? 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: Page? 20MR IRVING: I have page 295, my Lord, but that is my copy which 21I printed out again. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I imagine it is the same page for us too, is 23it not. 24MR IRVING: I would not bank on it. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: It obviously is not. 26MR IRVING: Would the witness kindly read out the paragraph

. P-186

1I have outlined beginning with "Today the four holes 2cannot be found". 3A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Can I -- I just want to let -- I will try to find the page 4number. It is in the Leuchter interrogation. 5MR JUSTICE GRAY: Mr Irving, I am in your hands about time. 6You remember I said I would rise whenever was convenient 7to you after a quarter to 4. 8MR IRVING: My Lord, you may apprehend that the trap is now 9sprung and it would be a pity to put the mouse back in its 10cage. 11MR JUSTICE GRAY: The trap is what you have just asked? 12MR IRVING: Precisely it, my Lord. There are no holes in that 13roof. There were never any holes in that roof. All the 14eyewitnesses on whom he relies are therefore exposed as 15liars. 16MR JUSTICE GRAY: I am just identifying the trap. 17A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
OK. Now if I am sitting in the trap I will take a little 18longer to look for the information because ---- 19MR IRVING: Take as long as you like. 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
--- because I prefer to remain in the trap and eat the 21cheese while it lasts! OK, we are here at page 518, my 22Lord. 23MR IRVING: 518? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. The bottom two lines: "Today, these four small holes 25that connected the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys 26cannot be observed in the ruined remains of the concrete

. P-187

1slab. Yet does this mean they were never there? We know 2that after the cessation of the gassings in the fall of 31944 all the gassing equipment was removed, which implies 4both the wire-mesh columns and the chimneys. What would 5have remained would have been the four narrow holes and 6the slab. While there is no certainty in this particular 7matter, it would have been logical to attach at the 8location where the columns had been some formwork at the 9bottom of the gas chamber ceiling, and pour some concrete 10in the hole and thus restore the slab." 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Hold it there. So what you are saying is with the Red 12Army just over the River Vistula ever since November 1944 13and about to invade and, as we found out earlier this 14morning, the personnel of Auschwitz concentration camp in 15a blue funk and destroying their records and doing what 16they can, some SS Rottenfuhrer has been given the rotten 17job of getting up there with a bucket and spade and 18cementing in those four holes, in case after we have blown 19up the building they show? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I would like to point out that the gas chamber was removed 21in November 1944. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
The gas chamber was removed? 23A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
The gas chamber, the installations were removed. The 24installations in the gas chambers were removed. Also 25during the month of November and December 1944, because 26the Germans were still confident that they could hold back

. P-188

1the Bolshevik hoard from the East, they were creating gas 2type air raid shelters in Auschwitz at that moment. They 3had started constructing these things just before. So 4there was still some local, small-term, small site 5construction activity going on. This was very primitive, 6but certainly the SS would have been able in November 71944, even December 1944, to repair the roof and to remove 8the evidence of the holes. The invasion, the offensive, 9only started on January 12th, as we have established 10before. 11Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor van Pelt, do you know what the phrase in 12architecture, "fair face finish" or "fair face concrete" 13refers to? 14A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I can guess, yes. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
It means concrete which is left bare to the public. Are 16you aware that this is one of the most expensive finishes 17that an architect can specify? 18A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Because -- can you speculate as to the reason why it is so 20expensive? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Because it is very difficult to get a very even texture. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
I know this. I worked for three years in a concrete gang 23with John Lang working my way through university, so I 24know how difficult it was to get the concrete right. If 25it was not properly vibrated and you had a cavity, you had 26to take down the whole beam because you cannot plaster

. P-189

1over it in a way that it does not show. Is this not so? 2A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes. 3Q.
[Mr Irving]
So you would expect that it would be unlikely that these 4panic stricken Germans could have managed to trowel the 5finish on both the gravel covered side of the roof and the 6underside of the roof in such a way that nothing would 7show, you would not see what is called a drying line 8around the circle where the hatch had once been. Is that 9correct, you would expect to find a drying line? 10A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
If you would have had this kind of concrete, but, sadly 11enough, one does not have that kind of concrete in the 12ceiling of morgue No. 1 of crematorium (ii). There is 13actually one little place you can go under it, and this is 14where Mr Leuchter derived some of his samples, and I have 15been also in that place and, in fact, the formwork is a 16complete mess. It is a very irregular formwork. You 17cannot draw any conclusion from that formwork one way or 18the other of what kind of hole was located where. 19Q.
[Mr Irving]
Is it not so that when you have formwork made of wooden 20planks, the concrete retains the grain of the wood; you 21can see the grain of the wood and that too would show that 22you could not plaster over the holes in such a way that 23Holocaust deniers years later would not find them? 24A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, but there is one problem, and that is the column 25which remains. There is one column remains and it is the 26second column. The second column of the crematorium

. P-190

1remains. So it is not a column to which one of these mesh 2columns was attached. The mesh columns were attached to 3the first, the third, the fifth and the seventh. 4Q.
[Mr Irving]
Fortuitously, the one that remains was the one that did 5not have the wire mesh? 6A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
Yes, or sadly so for your case maybe. So, in any case, we 7cannot draw any conclusions from the nature of the 8formwork around that column because that is not a column 9where the wire-mesh column was. So, I mean ---- 10Q.
[Mr Irving]
I am talking about the ceiling. 11A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There is a one little bit of ceiling only visible. The 12amount of ceiling is only a few square metre there. You 13can crawl under the roof of Leichenkeller No. 1. I have 14done it and I have looked at that roof. 15Q.
[Mr Irving]
Professor van Pelt, would it surprise you to hear that the 16Poles have made 400 photographs of the underside of that 17roof in an attempt to map every square inch of it looking 18for those holes and they failed? 19A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
But the problem is that holes are not under that part. 20Q.
[Mr Irving]
The holes are not under that part? 21A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
I mean, the roof falls back into the ground. 22Q.
[Mr Irving]
Here is a map of the roof as it now is. This is the large 23yellow page that I gave his Lordship, right? There are no 24holes in that. It has been mapped from top and bottom. 25The only holes that exist are where it has been punched 26through in recent years by people curious about what is

. P-191

1going on underneath, and you can see that is the case 2because the steel reinforcing bars have been bent back, 3and the one place where the pillar has also broken 4through. The holes that your eyewitnesses refer to, as 5you correctly say, cannot be found for the simple reason 6they were never there and there is not the slightest trace 7of them being there, and I also draw your attention, my 8Lord, if you go back to page 184 ---- 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. 10MR IRVING: --- about 10 lines down: "The showers were fitted 11to small blocks of wood sealed into the concrete roof of 12the gas chamber". We have probably all seen these little 13blocks of wood that get embedded in the concrete when it 14is poured, so that things can be screwed to those little 15blocks of wood. Those little blocks of wood also are not 16in the ceiling, as you can see, my Lord, as I gave you two 17photographs in a heap this morning. I gave your Lordship 18two photographs, colour photographs, in a heap this 19morning. 20MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes. I am just underlining that. 21MR IRVING: I cannot find mine. 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I have got ---- 23MR IRVING: Yes. 24MR JUSTICE GRAY: --- the ones you gave me. 25MR IRVING: One is of the underside of the concrete roof and 26you can see -- exactly, my Lord -- you can see the

. P-192

1condition of the concrete roof underneath this messy slab 2is in. You can see the wooden markings on the concrete 3where formwork was all these years ago when they built 4crematorium No. 2 in Auschwitz. You can appreciate that 5if there had been those holes in the roof, which are the 6cardinal linchpin of the Defence in this action, they 7would have been found by now. They have not found them, 8and so their eyewitness evidence collapses because these 9people are exposed for the liars they were. 10 My Lord, it is four minutes to 4. Unless 11Mr Rampton wishes to say something to repair the damage at 12this point ---- 13A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
My Lord, may I respond to this? 14MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, but not until 10 be 30 tomorrow 15morning. What I would be like to know from you then is 16what evidence there is from the likes of Taiber about the 17way in which the pellets were inserted into the gas 18chamber. In other words, are there other witnesses who 19describe that? 20A.
[Professor Robert Jan van Pelt]
There are other witnesses. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: We will have to deal with Kuhler as well, 22will we not, Mr Irving? 23MR IRVING: I think so, my Lord, to have a look at the 24wire-mesh columns. 25MR JUSTICE GRAY: I hope you will have enough time. If you get 26into difficulties I will be sympathetic. 10.30 tomorrow.